UNIFIL Withdrawal Rumors and Lebanon's Request for Mission Extension
Diplomats describe reports of potential UNIFIL withdrawal as mere rumors amid Lebanon's efforts for mission renewal.
Diplomatic sources have characterized recent speculation regarding the possible withdrawal of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) as 'inaccurate' and 'just rumors.' This comes as anticipation grows around a request from the Lebanese government to extend UNIFIL's mandate, which is set to expire at the end of August 2023.
A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department indicated that the reports in question were not accurate, although further details were not provided.
UNIFIL has experienced a changing operational landscape in recent months following hostilities along the Lebanese-Israeli border, intensified by Hezbollah's involvement following Hamas's attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. There are ongoing efforts to 'align' UNIFIL's mission with the new developments stemming from the ceasefire agreement reached between Lebanon and Israel, which aimed to curb hostilities.
UNIFIL has been deployed in South Lebanon since March 1978, with its mandate modified after the Israeli invasion in 1982 and following the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah.
Each year, discussions around UNIFIL's mandate re-emerge as various countries seek to modify its tasks.
Currently, UNIFIL's operational area extends from the Litani River to the Blue Line, involving over 10,000 troops from about 50 countries, supplemented by approximately 800 civilian staff.
In the area, around 4,000 Lebanese soldiers are stationed.
UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti noted that the main challenge faced by UNIFIL is the absence of a long-term political resolution between Lebanon and Israel.
He reiterated the force's commitment to encouraging both parties to renew their commitment to fully implementing Security Council Resolution 1701, which calls for tangible steps towards addressing unresolved provisions, including a permanent ceasefire.
Tenenti indicated that it is premature to speculate on how UNIFIL's mandate might look after August, emphasizing that such decisions fall under the purview of the Security Council.
Diplomats have expressed that reports from Israeli media suggesting that the United States leans towards requesting an end to UNIFIL's mandate represent an 'ordinary exaggeration' aimed at influencing Lebanon and other parties interested in renewing UNIFIL's role in maintaining stability in Southern Lebanon, along the Blue Line.
Western diplomats indicated that UN officials are awaiting a message from Lebanon expressing the desire to extend the mission for an additional year.
It is anticipated that such a message will include a clear request for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all occupied Lebanese territories, including five hills where Israeli troops have been stationed for months.
According to the ceasefire agreement that took effect on November 27 last year, Israel was to withdraw from Lebanon within 60 days; however, this has not occurred.
Israel subsequently sought to extend its presence in Southern Lebanon until February 18 of this year, a request supported by Washington.
Israeli forces remain positioned at the hills of Hammam, Al-Awaida, Jabal Al-Balat, Al-Lebona, and Al-Azizah.
Lebanon is pursuing a resolution to this issue through a five-member body overseeing the implementation of the ceasefire and through intensive communications between Lebanese and U.S. officials.
Lebanon also aims to include in its request the release of Lebanese individuals currently held by Israel.
A diplomat indicated that France, as the 'penholder' concerning Lebanon's matters in the Security Council, intends to continue working towards renewing UNIFIL's mandate.
Concerns about the potential withdrawal of UNIFIL have been echoed in Israeli publications, warning that such a move could destabilize Lebanon by exposing it to direct Israeli military actions, particularly while the Lebanese government struggles to disarm Hezbollah and Palestinian factions.
There is a perception that Israel seeks to impose new security arrangements on the border with Lebanon, leveraging the willingness of the U.S. administration to meet its demands.
The Israeli Institute for National Security Studies has recently suggested that Israel and the U.S. should initiate a joint diplomatic effort to terminate UNIFIL's mandate as part of broader security arrangements between Israel and Lebanon, under U.S. sponsorship, involving integrated security mechanisms to replace the international force.
Reports indicate that the U.S. has not yet made a definitive decision regarding its future support for UNIFIL but seeks substantial reforms, which could imply a reduction in support.
Justifications cited by the U.S. for reconsidering its position on UNIFIL include a desire to reduce the U.N. budget and to enhance direct security cooperation between Israel and Lebanon.
UN officials refrained from commenting on U.S. or Israeli positions regarding the renewal of UNIFIL but emphasized the necessity for UNIFIL to maintain freedom of movement within its operational area.
They noted that the force carries out hundreds of operational activities daily, with rare incidents of restrictions on their mobility, often due to misunderstandings or local residents mistakenly believing that Lebanese army personnel require their presence.
UNIFIL confirmed that they can conduct operations with or without the Lebanese army, in accordance with Resolution 1701. The implementation of the resolution remains the responsibility of the parties involved, as UNIFIL lacks the mandate to enforce it forcibly.
Tenenti observed that UNIFIL does not have the authority to enter any location by force unless there is credible evidence of impending hostile activities in that area.
He reiterated that, as is the case in any sovereign nation, a legal framework exists for accessing private properties.
Notably, during the past five months since the ceasefire agreement, UN peacekeepers reported discovering approximately 225 suspected weapon and ammunition caches, referring all findings to the Lebanese armed forces.
A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department indicated that the reports in question were not accurate, although further details were not provided.
UNIFIL has experienced a changing operational landscape in recent months following hostilities along the Lebanese-Israeli border, intensified by Hezbollah's involvement following Hamas's attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. There are ongoing efforts to 'align' UNIFIL's mission with the new developments stemming from the ceasefire agreement reached between Lebanon and Israel, which aimed to curb hostilities.
UNIFIL has been deployed in South Lebanon since March 1978, with its mandate modified after the Israeli invasion in 1982 and following the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah.
Each year, discussions around UNIFIL's mandate re-emerge as various countries seek to modify its tasks.
Currently, UNIFIL's operational area extends from the Litani River to the Blue Line, involving over 10,000 troops from about 50 countries, supplemented by approximately 800 civilian staff.
In the area, around 4,000 Lebanese soldiers are stationed.
UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti noted that the main challenge faced by UNIFIL is the absence of a long-term political resolution between Lebanon and Israel.
He reiterated the force's commitment to encouraging both parties to renew their commitment to fully implementing Security Council Resolution 1701, which calls for tangible steps towards addressing unresolved provisions, including a permanent ceasefire.
Tenenti indicated that it is premature to speculate on how UNIFIL's mandate might look after August, emphasizing that such decisions fall under the purview of the Security Council.
Diplomats have expressed that reports from Israeli media suggesting that the United States leans towards requesting an end to UNIFIL's mandate represent an 'ordinary exaggeration' aimed at influencing Lebanon and other parties interested in renewing UNIFIL's role in maintaining stability in Southern Lebanon, along the Blue Line.
Western diplomats indicated that UN officials are awaiting a message from Lebanon expressing the desire to extend the mission for an additional year.
It is anticipated that such a message will include a clear request for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all occupied Lebanese territories, including five hills where Israeli troops have been stationed for months.
According to the ceasefire agreement that took effect on November 27 last year, Israel was to withdraw from Lebanon within 60 days; however, this has not occurred.
Israel subsequently sought to extend its presence in Southern Lebanon until February 18 of this year, a request supported by Washington.
Israeli forces remain positioned at the hills of Hammam, Al-Awaida, Jabal Al-Balat, Al-Lebona, and Al-Azizah.
Lebanon is pursuing a resolution to this issue through a five-member body overseeing the implementation of the ceasefire and through intensive communications between Lebanese and U.S. officials.
Lebanon also aims to include in its request the release of Lebanese individuals currently held by Israel.
A diplomat indicated that France, as the 'penholder' concerning Lebanon's matters in the Security Council, intends to continue working towards renewing UNIFIL's mandate.
Concerns about the potential withdrawal of UNIFIL have been echoed in Israeli publications, warning that such a move could destabilize Lebanon by exposing it to direct Israeli military actions, particularly while the Lebanese government struggles to disarm Hezbollah and Palestinian factions.
There is a perception that Israel seeks to impose new security arrangements on the border with Lebanon, leveraging the willingness of the U.S. administration to meet its demands.
The Israeli Institute for National Security Studies has recently suggested that Israel and the U.S. should initiate a joint diplomatic effort to terminate UNIFIL's mandate as part of broader security arrangements between Israel and Lebanon, under U.S. sponsorship, involving integrated security mechanisms to replace the international force.
Reports indicate that the U.S. has not yet made a definitive decision regarding its future support for UNIFIL but seeks substantial reforms, which could imply a reduction in support.
Justifications cited by the U.S. for reconsidering its position on UNIFIL include a desire to reduce the U.N. budget and to enhance direct security cooperation between Israel and Lebanon.
UN officials refrained from commenting on U.S. or Israeli positions regarding the renewal of UNIFIL but emphasized the necessity for UNIFIL to maintain freedom of movement within its operational area.
They noted that the force carries out hundreds of operational activities daily, with rare incidents of restrictions on their mobility, often due to misunderstandings or local residents mistakenly believing that Lebanese army personnel require their presence.
UNIFIL confirmed that they can conduct operations with or without the Lebanese army, in accordance with Resolution 1701. The implementation of the resolution remains the responsibility of the parties involved, as UNIFIL lacks the mandate to enforce it forcibly.
Tenenti observed that UNIFIL does not have the authority to enter any location by force unless there is credible evidence of impending hostile activities in that area.
He reiterated that, as is the case in any sovereign nation, a legal framework exists for accessing private properties.
Notably, during the past five months since the ceasefire agreement, UN peacekeepers reported discovering approximately 225 suspected weapon and ammunition caches, referring all findings to the Lebanese armed forces.
