Analysis: Despite the recent ceasefire, tensions between Israel and Hezbollah still present risks for Irish and UNIFIL peacekeepers in Lebanon
By Ray Murphy, University of Galway
The current situation in Lebanon has focused attention on the role of the UNIFIL peacekeeping force and the predicament of Irish forces recently deployed there. The recent ceasefire agreement is a cause for optimism, but Israel and Hezbollah are still exchanging blows and this risks triggering further hostilities.
Israel's last invasion of Lebanon in 2006 ended with the adoption of a much heralded UN Security Council resolution 1701. The resolution seemed to point the way toward a lasting peace by obliging Lebanon to restrain Hezbollah and Israel to respect Lebanon’s sovereign frontiers.
Amongst the most immediate challenges confronting the Irish forces and UNIFIL will be implementing resolution 1701 and overseeing the current ceasefire agreement. This is inextricably linked to another challenge: how to ensure force protection in a hostile and volatile environment?
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's Saturday with Colm Ó Mongáin, should our defence forces be withdrawn from Lebanon?
Adopted in 2006, resolution 1701 called for a cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah based on a series of principles, including the establishment between the so-called Blue Line and the Litani river in south Lebanon of "an area free of any armed personnel, assets and weapons" other than those of the government and UNIFIL. The Blue Line is the withdrawal line set by the UN in 2000 to confirm the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon. It constitutes a de facto boundary between Lebanon and Israel in the absence of an agreed-upon border between the two states.
The cessation of hostilities announcement provides that the Lebanese government will prevent Hezbollah and other armed groups in Lebanon from carrying out operations against Israel, while Israel will not conduct any offensive military operations against Lebanese targets. Israel will withdraw its forces south of the Blue Line in a phased manner. In parallel, the Lebanese Armed Forces will deploy to positions south of the Litani river and will begin carrying out a number of tasks including dismantling any military infrastructure and weapons belonging to Hezbollah and other armed groups.
The recent Israeli offensive seemed to be taking into account lessons from 2006 but reflected a failure to learn key lessons from its 1982 invasion. While a heavy military assault in that conflict achieved short-term success for Israel, it also created long-term security, political and humanitarian problems. Hezbollah in particular was able to build strength based on the local population’s resentment of Israeli occupation and intervention.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's Morning Ireland in Oct 2024, UN says Israeli tanks burst into peacekeeper base
While Hezbollah agreed to withdraw its forces from southern Lebanon to the Litani River, it is unlikely to voluntarily surrender the remainder of its weapons that it has scattered throughout Lebanon. The question is not just whether the Lebanese army is capable of forcing Hezbollah to disarm, but whether it has a political mandate to act on something that could push the country into a new civil war. It is not clear what UNIFIL’s role is in these circumstances.
Since 2006, UNIFIL has remained a mission straddling the line somewhere between traditional peacekeeping and more robust peace enforcement. This has caused serious rifts among permanent members of the Security Council, especially in relation to UNIFIL’s freedom of movement. In the past, the US has criticised UNIFIL and advocated for a more assertive role in confronting armed groups. This criticism is unfair. Why should UNIFIL become an instrument of US or Israeli foreign policy?
A key provision of the ceasefire agreement concerns a mechanism to "monitor, verify, and assist in ensuring enforcement" of the ceasefire commitments. Israel and Lebanon will report any alleged violations to an agreed tripartite mechanism and UNIFIL, and the mechanism will develop procedures to "consult, inspect, gather information, and assist in ensuring the enforcement" of the commitments stipulated in the cessation of hostilities agreement.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Archives, Irish soldiers receive medals for courageous behaviour in 1984 while on United Nations peacekeeping duty
The mechanism will also coordinate the execution of a plan for the Lebanese forces’ deployment south of the Litani river and the "phased withdrawal" of the Israeli forces south of the Blue Line, which "should not exceed 60 days". The 60 day time frame for the Israeli withdrawal is too long and risks undermining the overall ceasefire agreement.
In effect, Hezbollah has agreed to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1701 by pulling back to behind the Litani river, some 25km from the border area, while Israel retains the right to continue violating Lebanese airspace and to intervene militarily whenever it sees fit. That may not be explicitly part of the agreement, but it is clearly the ongoing reality. This may prove to be the Achilles heel of the agreement and trigger a resumption of hostilities.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's News at One, Jacqui Fox talks to returning Irish peacekeeping troops and their families at Dublin Airport
In this way, UNIFIL and Irish soldiers may find themselves in the middle of the fighting once again. Right now Lebanon does not have the 10,000 troops needed to deploy to the south and this will put additional pressure on UNIFIL. The US and Israel have consistently pushed for a more robust response from UNIFIL to the perceived threat from armed groups such as Hezbollah. For their part in the past, Hezbollah failed to abide by resolution 1701 and proved uncooperative and often hostile towards UNIFIL.
Although UNIFIL has always confronted a near impossible situation and failed to implement its mandate, its presence in the south was crucial to reaching the agreement on the current ceasefire. It has fulfilled an important role in negotiation, mediation and confidence building that remains important. UNIFIL’s role continues to be crucial but its future is contingent on factors outside its control.
Follow RTÉ Brainstorm on WhatsApp and Instagram for more stories and updates
Prof Ray Murphy is a professor at the Irish Centre for Human Rights at the University of Galway
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
