The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), originally created by the UN Security Council in March 1978, was established in response to Israel’s invasion of Lebanon the same year. The primary objectives of the peacekeeping force were to confirm Israeli withdrawal, restore international peace and security, and assist the Lebanese government in regaining effective control over the southern region of the country. This mandate, however, has been amended multiple times to adapt to new developments. For instance, during Israel’s second invasion in 1982 and subsequent withdrawal in 2000, UNIFIL’s mandate expanded to address emerging tensions in the region.
In the wake of the July-August 2006 conflict between Hezbollah and Israel, the Security Council further extended the force’s role. In addition to its original duties, the mission was enhanced to include monitoring the cessation of hostilities, assisting the Lebanese Armed Forces in their deployment, and facilitating humanitarian access to civilian populations affected by the conflict. Despite these adjustments, the mission continues to face significant challenges. Today, the peacekeepers, known for wearing their distinctive blue helmets, are no longer just neutral actors facilitating peace but have become targets of warfare themselves in the current conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. This raises a critical question: has the mission of UN peacekeepers in Lebanon failed?
The UN Peacekeeping Forces, often celebrated for their efforts to restore peace in war-torn regions, were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1988. Their role in various global missions was commended for preventing conflicts and creating conditions for peaceful negotiations; however, they also faced a plethora of obstacles. One of the most pressing issues they face today is that their mission to maintain peace has increasingly placed them in harm’s way, making them direct targets in the conflicts they are meant to mediate. The situation in southern Lebanon is emblematic of this shift. UNIFIL was designed to protect peace and security along the Lebanon-Israel border, but rising tensions between Hezbollah and Israel have made the region a danger zone for peacekeepers. Recently, on October 13, 2024, Israel called for the evacuation of UNIFIL troops after multiple incidents where peacekeepers were injured and their posts targeted in crossfire.
The UN Peacekeeping mission has been hailed as one of the most ambitious international efforts to promote peace. However, it is not without significant failures. Two glaring examples are the 1994 Rwandan Genocide and the Srebrenica massacre during the Yugoslav Wars. In both cases, UN peacekeepers were present but unable to prevent the atrocities from unfolding. In Rwanda, despite early warnings of impending mass violence, the UN mission was understaffed and under-equipped to respond effectively. This led to the deaths of approximately 800,000 people in just 100 days. Similarly, in Srebrenica, peacekeepers failed to protect Bosniak Muslims from genocide, resulting in the deaths of more than 8,000 men and boys. These failures not only demonstrate the limitations of UN peacekeeping operations but also cast doubt on whether the international community has learned from its mistakes. Despite these lessons, similar issues continue to plague contemporary missions, including the UNIFIL mission in Lebanon.
The recent calls for UNIFIL’s evacuation bring the broader issue of peacekeeping missions into sharp relief. As hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel flare up, the very presence of peacekeepers has been called into question. Three UNIFIL peacekeepers have already been injured, and several of their posts have been struck, either intentionally or unintentionally, by Israeli forces. This situation begs the question: If the very presence of peacekeepers no longer serves as a deterrent, should they simply retreat, as Israel has suggested, and what does this mean for a mission that has been in place for over four decades? The notion that peacekeepers can be forced to abandon their posts due to safety concerns undermines the essence of their mission. Peacekeepers are deployed to prevent conflict and ensure the protection of civilians. However, when they become targets themselves, the mission becomes untenable. Furthermore, does their withdrawal suggest that the international community has given up on supporting Lebanon in its long-standing conflicts, and by extension, on peace itself?
The safety of UN peacekeepers is protected under various international legal frameworks. According to the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, deliberate attacks on UN personnel are considered war crimes. In addition, peacekeepers are afforded special protections under the Geneva Conventions. However, legal protections have proven to be more theoretical than practical. When peacekeepers are attacked, the perpetrators are rarely held accountable. For instance, despite clear evidence of violence against peacekeepers in Lebanon, there have been no significant legal repercussions for the attackers. One wonders: Who has the authority to enforce laws protecting peacekeepers when host nations or warring factions refuse to cooperate? This dilemma is further complicated by the neutrality of peacekeepers. Their mission requires them to remain impartial, often putting them in precarious positions where they cannot defend themselves or retaliate without breaching their mandate.
As the situation in southern Lebanon worsens, the human cost of peacekeeping becomes increasingly evident. UN peacekeepers, once lauded as the guardians of international peace, are now being targeted in the very conflicts they are sent to prevent. While peacekeepers play an essential role in global conflict resolution, their vulnerability raises doubts about the effectiveness of the current peacekeeping model. When the Blue Helmets are no longer seen as untouchable protectors of peace, but rather as expendable targets in conflict zones, it becomes clear that reforms are needed. The UN Peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, like many others, faces significant challenges that put the lives of peacekeepers in jeopardy. Without substantial reforms and a renewed commitment to protecting those who serve in the name of peace, missions like UNIFIL may ultimately fail to fulfill their objectives.
Image source: Wikimedia Commons
