This is how Britain preserved the peace of the world, mostly successfully, for a century before the Americans took over. And the Americans did precisely the same.
Look, if you want peace, somebody has to enforce it. If the central government has no teeth - well, if you're very, very lucky and privileged in your geography, history and politics, you get Costa Rica, but more likely you get Somalia or Afghanistan.
One way of "keeping peace" is to put your own soldiers in there. But that's - unfashionable, now. Also, not at all by coincidence, hideously dangerous and ruinously expensive. Or you can try to trick, cajole, shame or bribe another country into doing it for you, but that has most of the same drawbacks plus the fact that you have no direct control over what they do, because their goals are different from yours.
The only other way - note, only other way - is to pick a local team who will do the job for you, and support them. This is far cheaper, more acceptable to voters just about everywhere, and much more sustainable. But of course it means you have to let the local team set their own agenda, like the mujahedin in Afghanistan.
The only time it seriously backfires is when you badly misjudge the local team and find yourself supporting someone really nasty. And we've all done that, the French and Germans as well as the British and Americans.