UN peacekeeping forces prepare to leave Lebanon, but what comes next?
The UN Security Council has approved the expiration of the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission in Lebanon by the end of 2026, despite recent violence and six peacekeeper fatalities, following U.S.-led pressure and Resolution 2790. The withdrawal raises concerns about the Lebanese Armed Forces’ ability to enforce Resolution 1701, as Hezbollah remains armed and tensions with Israel persist, while UN-led alternatives like the smaller OGL mission or base repurposing are under consideration.
The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) will end its mandate by the end of 2026, as mandated by UN Security Council Resolution 2790, adopted in August 2023 under U.S. pressure. The decision follows years of debate and comes amid renewed violence in southern Lebanon, where six peacekeepers have already died. UNIFIL, established in 1978 to oversee Israel’s withdrawal and restore stability, currently deploys around 8,500 personnel from nearly 50 countries to monitor ceasefires, aid humanitarian access, and support the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) in the region. Resolution 1701, adopted after the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war, remains the framework for future arrangements, even after UNIFIL’s withdrawal. The Security Council has tasked UN Secretary-General António Guterres with proposing options by June 1, 2024, for implementing its provisions, including the disarmament of armed groups and the withdrawal of foreign forces. However, the LAF—under-equipped, underfunded, and understaffed—lacks the capacity to disarm Hezbollah or confront Israel, raising concerns about potential instability or sectarian conflict. The withdrawal process includes plans for personnel redeployment and the disposal of bases, with some suggesting facilities could be repurposed for Lebanese state use or, in a contested scenario, Israeli military control. Analysts propose alternatives like expanding the smaller UN-led Military Observer Group Lebanon (OGL) or maintaining Resolution 1701’s core principles through other mechanisms. Chiara Ruffa, a political science professor at Sciences Po Paris, notes that Israel’s intentions will determine the fate of these sites, while Raymond Murphy, a former UNIFIL peacekeeper, emphasizes the need to uphold Resolutions 1701 and 1559, which call for foreign troop withdrawals and armed group disarmament. Critics argue the decision is premature, as UNIFIL’s presence has been crucial for humanitarian corridors, civilian protection, and coordinating military dialogues like the Tripartite meetings between Israel, Lebanon, and UNIFIL. Without UNIFIL, coordination mechanisms may collapse, increasing risks of war crimes, civilian casualties, and regional escalation. The U.S. has framed the withdrawal as a step toward greater Lebanese sovereignty, but analysts warn the LAF’s limitations and Hezbollah’s armed status could undermine peace efforts.
This content was automatically generated and/or translated by AI. It may contain inaccuracies. Please refer to the original sources for verification.