Maintaining the mission provides a necessary, albeit imperfect, buffer that prevents immediate, large-scale military confrontation between state and non-state actors.

A continued UN presence signals international commitment to regional stability, which can deter aggressive posturing from regional powers.

The mission has proven ineffective at preventing conflict, and continuing it only maintains a failed status quo that does not address the root causes of regional instability.

The presence of international peacekeepers provides a level of protection for local civilian populations who would otherwise be caught in the crossfire of a renewed conflict.

Replacing a 7,500-person force is logistically impossible before the end of the year, making an extension the only realistic option to maintain order.

Extending the mandate allows for more time to negotiate a sustainable, long-term security framework that avoids a dangerous power vacuum.

The international community should not continue to fund a mission that has failed to meet its primary objectives, and those resources should be redirected toward more effective regional initiatives.

Allowing the mandate to expire forces regional actors to take direct responsibility for their own security, which is the only path to a lasting and genuine peace.

Ending the mandate is a necessary step to allow for a new, more effective security architecture that aligns with current regional realities and strategic goals.

The presence of foreign peacekeeping forces limits the ability of the host nation to exercise full control over its own territory and security institutions.