The recommendation by Maurice Baril to withdraw UNAMIR forces was set against a backdrop of intense violence and humanitarian crisis in Rwanda, where ethnic tensions had erupted into widespread massacres. The United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR) was initially deployed to help implement the Arusha Accords, aimed at bringing peace between the Hutu and Tutsi ethnic groups. However, as the genocide unfolded, the limitations of peacekeeping roles became glaringly evident. Baril's recommendation came amid calls for a more robust response to the escalating violence, as the forces on the ground were limited in their capacity to intervene effectively. The dire situation prompted discussions about the international community's responsibility to protect vulnerable populations. His suggestion to stand down was perceived as a failure to uphold the principle of protection while also reflecting the contentious nature of peacekeeping mandates.

Baril's stance drew significant attention as the world grappled with the realities of interventional ethics versus the capacity of UN forces. Analysts debated whether the UN's mandate in Rwanda was outdated given the scale of the humanitarian crisis. The complexities surrounding the nature of peacekeeping introduced discussions about the need for reform in global response strategies to prevent slaughter and ensure civilian safety. Many remain critical of how peacekeeping missions are deployed, especially when faced with overwhelming violence and the apparent inability of international forces to act decisively. This proved to be a turning point in peacekeeping discourse, as many began to advocate for a more comprehensive approach to international intervention, emphasizing the importance of a timely and decisive response from the global community when civilian lives are at stake.