Dhruba KarkiGurung, Anand2026-07-012026-07-012025https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14540/27136This dissertation examines the moral dilemma faced by individuals and UN peacekeepers through an analysis of two films: Hotel Rwanda and No Man’s Land. Although the institutional failures of the UN--caused by limited mandates, geopolitical interests and bureaucratic failures--during the Rwandan and Bosnian wars have been widely examined in scholarly literature, cinematic depiction of individuals caught between institutional orders and moral convictions in these two conflicts remains relatively under explored. The analysis is carried out to do just that by using multidisciplinary theoretical lens such as Darley & Latane’s Bystander Apathy Theory, which helps explain the passivity and inaction of individuals and institutions (like the UN) in the face of violence. Similarly, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Doctrine, a global political commitment adopted by the United Nations in 2005 to prevent genocide, offers the critical tools for examining the bureaucratic complicity that gives the impression of apathy and failure in protecting vulnerable populations. The findings of this research reveal key similarities as well as differences in how the two films portray UN peacekeepers as both victims of and complicit in systemic failure and why the much vaunted UN neutrality, when devoid of moral courage, only contributes to the continuation of atrocity. Ultimately, by analyzing cinematic portrayals of peacekeepers caught in moral dilemmas, this study highlights the need for greater accountability and ethical responsibility within global institutions and calls for a renewed commitment to the humanitarian principle of protecting vulnerable populations. Keywords: bystander apathy, genocide, humanitarian interventions, peacekeeping, UNen-USUN peacekeepersGlobal institutionsThesis