In today's world, some states have more "ambitious goals" than the others (Fordham, 2011, p.1). They tend to think in a proactive way and allocate their sources and political power in order to achieve these goals (Fordham, 2011). It would be naive to think that states would try to succeed on their ambitious interests and create absolutely no impact on peace world widely at the same time. In this article, conflicting interests of states and governments will be presented as the biggest threat to the world peace and peacekeeping. When someone mentions about interest conflicts, the very first thing comes up to mind is conflicts over scarce resources. Countries do not have enough resources want to keep up with the developments and provide acceptable solutions for their citizens and government on currently emerged needs of technology or already existing needs. Logically thinking, having scarce resources should mean power but, for undeveloped countries, it might mean a curse over country and directly over citizens' lives. After Congo had been independent from Belgium, millions of people died in Congo because of the militia groups (Autessere, 2008) fighting each other and killing locals over to reach for the natural resources such as diamonds, coltan and gold (Patrikarakos, 2010, p.1 & Ginifer, 2002). Patrikarakos says "Ever since Belgian rule, Congo has fed the world's lust for resources. During colonial times, we wanted rubber; today we want cassiterite and coltan, minerals that are used in the manufacture of PlayStations and mobile phones. In his article "Deliver Us from Evil" (2010, p.2). Now that UN peacekeepers are not very welcomed in Congo anymore, Patrikarakos (2010) worries if violation on locals and endless interventions of neighbors who desire to seize a part from the country's mineral richness would increase. Secondly, since human-beings as individuals, are the smallest milestones on the way of getting organized and become som