UNIFIL mandate nears end: UN Security Council weighs future of...

4^min

Report by Toni Mrad, English adaptation by Yasmine Jaroudi

The United Nations peacekeeping force in South Lebanon, which has operated in the country for decades, is due to leave at the end of this year. The question now facing the international community is what will replace it.

The future of the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, or UNIFIL, was discussed behind closed doors at the U.N. Security Council, where representatives of France, the United States, Britain, Russia and China reviewed developments in Lebanon and the future of Security Council Resolution 1701. Lebanon and Israel were not represented at the meeting.

Ahead of the session, each of the five permanent Security Council members outlined different positions on the mission's future and the broader security arrangements in South Lebanon.

The United States and Israel oppose extending UNIFIL’s mandate beyond the end of the year, arguing that the force failed to prevent Hezbollah from establishing military infrastructure near its positions.

Washington is instead seeking a new, more limited international presence linked to the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel.

According to the proposal, the new mechanism would focus on verifying the disarmament of Hezbollah, supporting the deployment of the Lebanese army and strengthening its capabilities, as well as monitoring implementation of security arrangements between Lebanon and Israel.

France, according to LBCI sources, is not insisting on maintaining UNIFIL in its current form but wants an international military presence to remain under the U.N. umbrella while negotiations between Lebanon and Israel continue.

Paris also continues to view Resolution 1701 as the central reference for any new security arrangements. The resolution calls for a cessation of hostilities, the deployment of the Lebanese army in the south, the exclusive possession of weapons by the Lebanese state and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanese territory.

Russia called in June for Lebanon and Israel to return to full compliance with Resolution 1701 and stressed the need to maintain an effective U.N. presence along the Blue Line after UNIFIL’s mandate expires.

China has taken a similar position, and has gone further in its calls regarding UNIFIL. Beijing has argued that the decision to withdraw the peacekeeping force should be reconsidered and that the Security Council must ensure a continued U.N. presence in Lebanon to prevent a security vacuum, while emphasizing the full implementation of Resolution 1701.

Britain has also reaffirmed its support for Resolution 1701, considering it the key framework for extending the authority of the Lebanese state across all of its territory.

Following the closed-door discussions, France is expected to begin work, with support from regional partners, on a draft outlining the future of Resolution 1701 and arrangements to fill the security gap after UNIFIL’s mandate expires.

As the Security Council’s “penholder” on the Lebanon file, France is responsible for taking the lead in drafting any new resolution or amendments concerning the issue.

According to LBCI sources, Paris is expected to prepare a proposal addressing the future of Resolution 1701 and the mechanism for replacing UNIFIL’s presence, before presenting it to the other Security Council members for discussion.