Pressure mounts in the south: Lebanon faces UNIFIL exit without a replacement

Report by Nada Andraos, English adaptation by Yasmine Jaroudi

Time is running out for Lebanon as efforts to secure a replacement for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) have so far failed, amid Israeli opposition to any new European or international force taking over from the U.N. peacekeepers.

The latest initiative is an expected visit to Lebanon by Jean-Pierre Lacroix, the U.N. under-secretary-general for peace operations, to discuss UNIFIL’s future and possible alternative arrangements. 

However, the visit is not expected to break the deadlock, given U.S. and Israeli insistence on ending the mission.

Even the European mission expected to arrive next month will not provide an on-the-ground replacement for UNIFIL, despite including the training of the Lebanese army to disarm Hezbollah among its objectives, as openly stated by EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas. 

UNIFIL's mandate under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 extends to monitoring the border, documenting violations and accompanying the Lebanese army in the south.

The lack of progress raises concerns over the absence of international monitoring and growing pressure for direct contact between the Lebanese and Israeli armies. LBCI sources say the Lebanese army categorically rejects such direct communication, raising a key question: How would the United States respond if the two armies came into direct contact?

Implementing Resolution 1701 now faces a major challenge. The resolution calls for an end to Hezbollah attacks and Israeli offensive military operations, as well as the withdrawal of Israeli forces in parallel with the deployment of the Lebanese army and UNIFIL. It also calls for respect for the Blue Line and Lebanon’s sovereignty, and for the area between the Blue Line and the Litani River to remain free of weapons and armed personnel, except for those belonging to the Lebanese state and the U.N. force.

These obligations do not expire with UNIFIL's departure. 

Nonetheless, withdrawing the peacekeepers without a replacement could leave the resolution as a theoretical framework with no effective mechanism to monitor or enforce its implementation.

Concerns are also growing that Lebanon could face continued pressure to extend state authority and bring weapons under state control without receiving guarantees of an Israeli withdrawal or an end to attacks. That could leave southern Lebanon at risk of shifting from an internationally regulated framework to a reality increasingly determined by the balance of power on the ground.