UNIFIL Under Fire: How Attacks in Southern Lebanon Are Eroding Global Peace Efforts

• MEDMed this WeekMiddle East and North Africa

The MED This Week newsletter provides informed insights on the most significant developments in the MENA region, bringing together unique opinions and reliable foresight on future scenarios and key issues which will be the focus of the 10th edition of the Rome MED Mediterranean Dialogues (25-27 November), co-organised by ISPI and the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation. Today, we shed light on attacks and violations against UNIFIL's peacekeeping forces.

While global attention shifts back to the Gaza Strip and the potential killing of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, international concern continues to mount over the safety of UNIFIL forces in Southern Lebanon. In the past two weeks, their bases and peacekeeping personnel have been repeatedly targeted by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF), in clear violation of international humanitarian law. The latest attack occurred yesterday, when an IDF tank fired on one of the mission's watchtowers. Both the United Nations and the European Union have condemned the assaults on peacekeepers, urging all parties to respect UNIFIL's mandate along the Blue Line. Following the EU's strong denunciations of the attacks on UNIFIL troops, Italian Prime Minister Meloni is expected to visit Lebanon to discuss the situation. Italy, being the largest European contributor to UNIFIL's forces, plays a key role in the mission. Despite all the international appeals, Israel has repeatedly called for the withdrawal of UNIFIL from Southern Lebanon, accusing the mission of providing protection to Hezbollah and serving as its "human shield". This demand has further strained Israel's already tense relations with the UN, which have deteriorated over the past year of conflict. Indeed, as Israel proceeds with its raids in Gaza, it is intensifying operations in Lebanon, increasingly compromising UNIFIL's ability to function effectively. However, the mission's effectiveness has long been contingent upon the often-uncooperative attitudes of both Israel and Hezbollah, as both sides have consistently violated the rules of engagement in Southern Lebanon and obstructed UNIFIL's evolving mandate for years.

We have invited experts from the ISPI and Rome MED Mediterranean Dialogues network to share their insights on the attacks and violations against UNIFIL's peacekeeping forces.

Attacks against UNIFIL are serious breaches of international law

"Israel's military repeatedly attacked UNIFIL, including a direct hit on its Naqoura headquarters on October 10. Since then, the IDF illegally invaded UN positions, injured peacekeepers, destroyed observation posts, disabled security cameras, obstructed patrols, and hindered peacekeepers from providing humanitarian aid. Under international law, UN peacekeepers are considered civilians, making such intentional attacks war crimes. Israel should immediately cease these violations, which must be prosecuted accordingly. However, international law is only seriously invoked in this context when it benefits Western and Israeli interests. Israel's defiance of the January 2024 order by the International Court of Justice to prevent genocidal acts highlights the double standard in applying international law. Given the declared aims of the belligerents, had the ICJ's decision been enforced, it is likely that Israel's invasion of Lebanon could have been avoided."

Susann Kassem, Leverhulme Early Career Fellow, Middle East Centre and the Faculty of Oriental Studies, Oxford University

How UNIFIL's mandate and composition have evolved since its establishment

"UNIFIL was established in 1978 (Resolutions 425/426), originally mandated to confirm the withdrawal of Israeli forces, restore international peace, and assist the Government of Lebanon in exercising effective authority in the area. Up to 4,000 troops were authorized (Res. 427, 1978). Resolution 501 (1982) added a mandate to potentially extend UNIFIL's protection and humanitarian assistance to the population, increasing the troop count to 7,000. Following the withdrawal of Israeli forces in 2000, UNIFIL's focus shifted to restoring international peace and security, operating as an observing and monitoring mission. In the same year, the Blue Line was set by the UN as a withdrawal border for Israeli forces from southern Lebanon. In 2004, Resolution 1559 called for strict respect of Lebanon's territorial integrity and political independence and requested the withdrawal of foreign forces from Lebanon, as well as the disbanding and disarming of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias. In 2006, with Resolution 1701, UNIFIL's size was increased (up to 15,000 troops), and its mandate was reshaped in light of the war between Israel and Hezbollah: UNIFIL was tasked with monitoring the cessation of hostilities and supporting the Lebanese Armed Forces' deployment throughout southern Lebanon. Additionally, UNIFIL extended its assistance to ensure humanitarian access to civilian populations, the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons, and to assist the Government of Lebanon in securing its borders and other entry points to prevent the illegal entry of arms. The most recent renewal, maintaining Resolution 1701's mandates, occurred in August 2024 when the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2749, extending UNIFIL's mandate for another year, until August 2025."

Andrea Ruggeri, Senior Associate Research Fellow, ISPI

UNIFIL's work is constrained by the aims of the conflicting parties

"UNIFIL's mandate, determined in UN resolutions 425, 426 and 1701, is to help the government of Lebanon exercise its sovereignty, including the deployment of its army, in South Lebanon, and guaranteeing that no other military force is deployed in this area. It is also responsible for providing humanitarian assistance to residents of South Lebanon. However, while it has been coordinating its work with the Lebanese army, it has been unable to prevent the full deployment of Hezbollah's military units in this area. In the past, its presence in South Lebanon has had some mitigating, preventative effects. But the current war, which in part is the result of Hezbollah's deployment along the border with Israel in violation of UN Resolution 1701, makes it impossible for UNIFL to carry out its mandate. UNIFIL can only perform its duties if and when the conflicting parties allow it to do so. Currently, Lebanon has no sovereign capacity, Hezbollah has no interest to cooperate with UNIFL, and Israel has no faith in UNIFIL's ability to vacate South Lebanon from Hezbollah's presence."

Asher Kaufman, Professor of History and Peace Studies, University of Notre Dame; Director, Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies

Only the UN Security Council can deter Israel from ramping up its attacks on UNIFIL

"Despite Israel's targeting of its personnel and intimidation of its leadership, UNIFIL must remain steadfast to fulfil its mandate and maintain credibility. It must remain in its positions at all costs both to document all violations of Resolution 1701 (with over two-thirds of all cross-border projectiles reportedly coming from the Israeli side since last October) and to carry out its core protection of civilian mandate. To protect Lebanese civilians trapped in their villages under Israeli fire and accompany ambulances and first responders who are being targeted by Israeli forces, UNIFIL is authorized to "take all necessary action… to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence." The UN Security Council must also act decisively by passing a resolution strongly supporting UNIFIL and insisting Israel be held accountable for further targeting it and civilians in its area of operation. Nothing else will deter Israel form ramping up its attacks on UNIFIL."

Karim Makdisi, Associate Professor, American University Beirut

Israeli attacks on UNIFIL unify outraged voices in the EU

"The Israeli attacks on UNIFIL have produced an unusual degree of unity and shared sense of outrage among EU members, including some of Israel's staunchest allies such as Italy and Austria. The 27 EU countries have jointly called the Israeli attacks a "grave violation of international law" that is "totally unacceptable". This stands in a marked contrast with the EU's inability to state the same about the killing of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza at any point over the last year. The question is whether this firm position will translate into a greater willingness to use EU tools of pressure, such as suspending the EU-Israel trade agreement - something which Israel's allies in the EU have so far persistently opposed."

Martin Konecny, Director, European Middle East Project (EuMEP)

The generation of a major crisis in Israel-UN ties is counterproductive

"Traditionally, Israelis hold a rather negative view of the UN. This has intensified since Oct. 7, 2023, and harsh Israeli rhetoric is also voiced towards the UN Secretary General. Israel's military actions in Gaza and Lebanon caused direct frictions with UN agencies and forces - e.g. UNRWA and UNIFIL. When it comes to UNIFIL, tensions exceeded the Israel-UN dimension, and also negatively impacted Israel's ties with allies in Europe. It is legit for Israel to demand clear UN condemnation of Hamas terror and more acknowledgement of its needs and concerns. However, generating a major crisis in Israel-UN ties, as the current Israeli far-right coalition is doing, is counterproductive. Israel aspires to be part of the international community, enhance its global standing and security, advance its bilateral and regional ties, and sustain its alliances. Practicing smart and professional diplomacy, which also seeks effective and sensitive engagement with the UN and other critics, can help Israel achieve such goals."

Nimrod Goren, Senior Fellow, Middle East Institute; President, Mitvim Institute; Co-Founder, Diplomeds

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.