Conflict and commitment: What are the challenges facing UNIFIL
Recently, the Israeli Defense Forces attacked the United Nations peacekeepers. This attack raises concerns about their safety. The United Nations Security Council has criticized these actions. According to it, the UN’s positions must never be attacked. This reflects a shared commitment among its 15 members to protect the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).
The Israeli Defense Forces threatened the peacekeepers and damaged United Nations equipment. Israel’s request for UNIFIL to move away from the border of safety is seen with doubts. This is because the IDF says that its aggressive actions against Hezbollah were only in self-defence. The United States and all European nations stand in favour of the UN and say that United Nations workers should not be harmed.
According to Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, any action against these workers could be considered war crimes. It highlights the importance of holding people responsible for protecting peacekeepers in conflict zones.
UNIFIL has lost many peacekeepers since 1978. The number of deceased individuals has reached 337. Despite this ongoing increase in numbers and dangers, the UN has stayed in Lebanon. This highlights its strong commitment even under pressure from the Israeli and South Lebanon Army.
This history makes it unlikely for UNIFIL to recommend reducing troop numbers.
The United Nations Security Council knows very well that if UNIFIL leaves, then a new way is needed to solve global conflicts. That is why mission mandates are often renewed, even for short periods.
A big risk to UNIFIL’s presence is if countries that send troops decide the dangers are too high and pull out. The current mission has many European troops, mainly from Italy, Spain, Ireland, and France. If any of these countries withdraw their forces, it could lead to a serious review of UNIFIL’s ability to continue its work in Lebanon.
The possible leave of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon could become the cause of severe complexities. If they do exist, it puts security and civilians in the area in significant danger. UNIFIL has crucial equipment under the leadership of nations that send troops, and moving this gear in a conflict zone would be very risky. The ongoing fights took the lives of many civilians; approximately 2306 people died and 10698 people were injured. In watching over the situation, UNIFIL plays an important role and it provides help to those who suffer. To continue this support, Israeli allies should compel Israeli Defense Forces to not attack UNIFIL.
The IDF might want to remove UNIFIL to give Hezbollah more freedom to act without international oversight. This situation is the same as the past incident when the IDF created a “zone of security” during the Lebanese civil war to protect Israel from different groups. It highlights the complicated balance between safety and humanitarian needs in the area.
Israel’s request to UNIFIL to move back 5 kilometers from the Blue Line. This appeal highlights that they might be planning to create a buffer zone. Many factors point towards this possibility, even though the significant complications between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and the Israeli government.
First, the IDF has deployed over 15,000 troops from at least four divisions in Lebanon, indicating this operation is more than just a minor action.
Second, there are 29 UNIFIL bases along the Blue Line. If the UN evacuates these, the IDF could take control of them and use them as military strongholds. Although these positions would need extra protection, they would still be valuable.
Finally, past tactics from 2006, which relied on airstrikes and limited ground operations against Hezbollah, failed. Many now believe that to ensure the safety of about 65,000 Israelis in northern Israel, a stronger military presence might be necessary.
Due to the ongoing tough situation in Lebanon, Israel has faced many challenges. In the past, the IDF had local support from the South Lebanon Army, but now there is no support for Israel from the Lebanese. This lack of support is a great hurdle in the development of the buffer zone.
It also increases the risk for northern Israeli villages from resistance groups.
The conflict has been dragging on for a long time, due to Benjamin Netanyahu’s reliance on military solutions for political problems. It may be possible to create a situation of “war forever.”
The IDF’s tactics suggest they are not considering the future costs of an extended military presence, which may result in ongoing violence and instability for both Israel and Lebanon.
