Lebanon pushes for U.N.-backed successor as UNIFIL mandate nears expiration

Analysts split on peacekeeping mission’s track record

Lebanon is working to preserve a United Nations presence in its south or secure a replacement force operating under a U.N. mandate, as the UNIFIL mission approaches its scheduled end at the close of 2026. Lebanese officials, backed by a parliamentary petition signed by 86 lawmakers, are simultaneously pursuing direct talks brokered by the United States with Israel on a new Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon and on the future security of the border region.

The U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon was established after Israel’s first invasion of southern Lebanon in 1978, with a mandate to confirm an Israeli withdrawal and help the Lebanese government restore its authority in the area. The force grew significantly in size and scope after the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war, and has operated continuously in the region since, though without an enforcement role under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701.

Lebanon’s new leadership is seeking to restore state sovereignty over the south at a moment when Hezbollah has been significantly weakened by the war, analysts said, and Israel has shown limited willingness to relinquish military gains from its campaign against the Iran-backed group. Without a U.N.-mandated international presence, Lebanese and Western analysts said, Lebanon risks losing a key source of protection and leverage and could find itself increasingly dependent on Israel and the United States.

Israeli officials have strongly criticized UNIFIL, accusing the force of allowing Hezbollah to strengthen its military presence in southern Lebanon since the 2006 war, in violation of Resolution 1701. The U.N. peacekeepers “had detected and reported suspected tunnel infrastructure” before the escalation in late 2023, UNIFIL spokesperson Kandice Ardiel said, but were not authorized to enter private property without permission, and Hezbollah supporters often blocked their access.

Ardiel said the role of peacekeepers has been to support the parties to the conflict, monitor and report on Resolution 1701’s implementation, not enforce it. She identified “the incomplete commitment by Lebanon and Israel implementing their obligations under Security Council resolutions” as the central challenge, alongside restrictions on peacekeepers’ freedom of movement, attacks against peacekeepers, and unauthorized weapons in southern Lebanon.

She pointed to the period between 2006 and 2023 along the Blue Line — the U.N.-identified line marking Israel’s withdrawal — as evidence of UNIFIL’s contribution. “From 2006 to 2023, the Blue Line saw the longest period of relative stability in recent history, allowing a whole generation of young people to grow up there without knowing conflict,” Ardiel said.

That stability collapsed with the war that began in late 2023. Israel’s military campaign has killed 8,915 people and wounded 30,543 since October 8, 2023, according to a tally Lebanon’s Ministry of Information released last Friday. Some 70 border villages have been reduced to rubble and rendered uninhabitable, and an extensive network of underground tunnels built by Hezbollah south of the Litani River has been revealed.

Retired Lebanese Maj. Gen. Abdul Rahman Chehaitli, who previously served as a liaison officer between the Lebanese government and UNIFIL and was involved in post-2026 negotiations on Resolution 1701, said the peacekeeping force “did not fail in its mission, but rather carried out its duties,” intervening on numerous occasions to prevent military escalations. The force, he added, “cannot prevent a war made by a decision.”

David Wood, a senior Lebanon analyst at the International Crisis Group, said UNIFIL never had a mandate to actively enforce disarmament by confronting Hezbollah. The Lebanese Army, “for its own reasons,” has not sought to confront Hezbollah or force its withdrawal from the area south of the Litani River, and needed political authorization that Lebanese governments long declined to provide, according to Wood.

For the United States, ending UNIFIL’s role fits within what analysts described as President Donald Trump’s broader efforts to sideline the United Nations and diminish its role in addressing global crises. Washington also appears to favor a new mechanism outside the existing U.N. framework.

Chehaitli warned that any new force without international legal authority would leave Lebanon “at the mercy” of the United States and Israel, “which is now treating Lebanon as a weak country and imposing its conditions on it.” UNIFIL, he said, “used to put Lebanon at the same level of Israel, not as Lebanon is weak and Israel is strong, and used to be not only a witness but also a referee.”

Lebanon is now discussing a potential replacement force with European powers. A U.N. Security Council mandate would provide “international legitimacy and backing to protect the (participating) troops,” while also securing Israeli and U.S. consent, making it the preferable course for any successor arrangement, Wood said.