Failure of institutions and Rwanada

The Sean Kay reading, "Neoliberalism: Institutions at War" while although it was a good piece, by showing how sometimes international institutions can fail in a crisis, I thought that the case study he used was not the best example of complete institutional breakdown. The case study that I believe would have been more relevant in showing the break down and the great possibilities of international institutions would be Rwanda.
The Rwandan crisis between 94'-96' was particularly bloody and was based on ethnic conflict. This conflict unlike the Kosovo conflict, according to many social scientists, was not a primordial ethnic conflict but a constructivist ethnic conflict, which usually means that there is a better possibility of solving it. Depending on who you ask as many as 1 million people were killed. When the issue came to light in the international spectrum there was a almost lack of movement. The only state that took actions to end the genocide was Belgium. The non-movement of the UN was caused by U.S. resistance to involvement in the domestic affairs of yet another African country. But the sad thing is that most scholars of IR say that the genocide could have all been ended if about 5,000 troops had been sent into Rwanda. This small number of troops would have easily intimidated the local populations who were mostly armed with machetes and were civilians. In addition to that in that in that region of Africa many of the local peoples have a "fear" of the white man from years of Dutch colonialism. This would have limited any serious attack that the Hutus could muster.
So, to Sean Kay, I say that your case study was good but you missed the boat on the issue that could have shown international institutions as a failure and a potential success.