<p>Peacekeeping is regarded by the United Nations (UN) as integral tool for international peace and security in which peacekeepers are sent to conflict-torn countries to help them navigate and rebuild their society to one of peace and stability. It operates within unique spaces of duality, both physically and discursively, wherein notions of 'peace' interacts with 'conflict'. The body of the peacekeeper may also be seen as a complex, albeit contradictory, figure of duality, in which notions of militarised masculinity are appropriated into 'soldiers for peace'. Concerningly, allegations continue to be reported of UN peacekeepers engaging in behavioural misconduct and human rights violations during missions, most notably, sexual exploitation and abuse against host-peacekeeping women and children. The dominant explanation for this issue is gender inequality. Previous studies examining this issue from a 'bottom-up' perspective have primarily focused on micro factors at either the individual or mission level, such as 'militarised masculinities' and 'hypermasculinity' that cause destructive normative behaviours among peacekeepers against vulnerable identities. Feminist studies also tend to point to UN strategies such as 'gender mainstreaming' as a solution to overcoming and preventing sexual exploitation and abuse through the equal representation and contribution of men and women in peacekeeping. While these factors are plausible, they largely neglect a macro-institutional examination of why sexual exploitation and abuse continues to be prevalent in peacekeeping missions worldwide. This study contributes to current knowledge by using empirical interview data to examine the UN's organisational and institutional power structures through a critical power elite framework. Findings reveal that sexual and gender-based violence at the micro peacekeeping mission level occur because of discrepancies at the macro systemic (institutional) and systematic (organisational)-level of UN peacekeeping. This study significantly demonstrates a discrepancy between discourse and action within UN peacekeeping due to unequal elite power dynamics. </p>