After UNIFIL, who will secure south Lebanon?

The departure of the UN peacekeeping mission after nearly five decades, amid a volatile security landscape in southern Lebanon marked by continued Israeli occupation and Hezbollah's refusal to dismantle its military and security apparatus, the very issues UNIFIL was established to address, has raised growing European concerns about leaving a dangerous security vacuum at a critical time.

Within this evolving context, Germany has renewed its call for the European Union (EU) to establish a new security mission in southern Lebanon. The initiative comes as Lebanon and Israel continue U.S.-mediated negotiations aimed at implementing a sustainable ceasefire, while the Lebanese government pursues efforts to strengthen state authority in the south and address the future of Hezbollah’s military and security presence. Although discussions regarding a post-UNIFIL arrangement have been underway for months, Berlin’s renewed proposal has intensified debate over whether an EU-led mission could realistically replace one of the UN’s longest-running peacekeeping operations

 

UNIFIL: A mission built on peacekeeping, not enforcement

Speaking exclusively to The Beiruter, UNIFIL spokesperson Kandice Ardiel highlighted that any future international presence would fundamentally differ from a UN peacekeeping mission because UN peacekeeping operates under a unique legal and institutional framework established by the UN Security Council.

UN peacekeeping is a very particular kind of activity established under a Security Council mandate, so any future arrangement would naturally be different from a UN peacekeeping mission.

She explained that although numerous proposals are being discussed regarding what may replace UNIFIL, the mission itself is not involved in those political negotiations. Instead, UNIFIL’s current priority is ensuring an orderly transition.

We are working to ensure that whatever transition happens, to whatever entity or institution, including the Lebanese authorities, is as smooth as possible and supports the rebuilding of security and stability in South Lebanon.

She stressed that while UNIFIL’s mandate will end on 1 January 2027, the mission will continue working within its mandate until then to facilitate a stable handover to whichever institution ultimately assumes responsibility.

Ardiel also highlighted a common misunderstanding surrounding UNIFIL’s legal authority. She explained that the mission has always operated as a Chapter VI peacekeeping operation rather than an enforcement mission.

We do not have a mandate to use force except in very limited circumstances, primarily self-defense and defense of civilians under imminent threat.

According to Ardiel, another widespread misconception has been that UNIFIL itself was responsible for implementing Resolution 1701.

The responsibility to implement the resolution belongs to the parties. Peacekeepers support that implementation.

 

Achievements and lessons after nearly 50 years

Reflecting on UNIFIL’s legacy, Ardiel argued that the mission’s greatest achievement was helping preserve nearly 2 decades of relative stability following the 2006 July War. She noted that between 2006 and 2023, southern Lebanon experienced its longest sustained period without large-scale war in recent memory. Peacekeepers, she added, “helped facilitate that period of stability, together with the commitment, although imperfect, of the parties to Resolution 1701.”

We had a generation of children who grew up who did not know war.

Beyond military monitoring, Ardiel highlighted UNIFIL’s extensive support for local communities through infrastructure projects, humanitarian assistance, and development initiatives designed to strengthen social stability.

Strong communities mean stability. Supporting local communities through infrastructure projects and humanitarian assistance was an essential part of our mission.

Equally important, she said, was the mission’s role as an impartial observer. “Peacekeepers were the ones impartially reporting to the Security Council exactly what was happening,” she explained, arguing that this independent reporting became increasingly valuable amid competing narratives from both sides of the Blue Line.

“It was important for the international community to have an impartial witness on the ground.

At the same time, she acknowledged that UNIFIL faced significant operational challenges, including incomplete implementation of Resolution 1701 by the parties themselves, persistent misinformation campaigns, and repeated questions regarding the mission’s neutrality despite its multinational composition, with personnel from more than 50 countries.

UNIFIL has spent almost 50 years working with the parties to build security and stability for the benefit of people on both sides of the Blue Line. Whatever comes next should pursue that same objective.

 

A historical preview of UNIFIL’s mission in Lebanon

UNIFIL was established in March 1978 under United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978) following Israel’s Operation Litani. Initially tasked with confirming Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanese territory, restoring international peace and assisting the Lebanese government in re-establishing authority in the south, the mission was intended to be temporary. Instead, it evolved into one of the UN’s longest-serving peacekeeping operations.

Following the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war, UNSC Resolution 1701 (2006) significantly expanded UNIFIL’s responsibilities. The mission grew to nearly 15,000 personnel and became responsible for monitoring the cessation of hostilities, supporting the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), facilitating humanitarian assistance, and helping maintain an area between the Blue Line and the Litani River free of unauthorized armed groups.

Despite its extensive presence, UNIFIL has frequently faced criticism for its inability to prevent repeated violations of Resolution 1701, including Israeli military operations, Hezbollah’s continued military infrastructure in southern Lebanon, and eventually the large-scale escalation that erupted after 7 October 2023.

Nevertheless, many argue that the mission played a critical stabilizing role by providing continuous monitoring, facilitating communication between both sides, and reducing the likelihood of misunderstandings escalating into wider conflict.

 

Europe’s vision for a post-UNIFIL mission

Wadephul argued that the EU should examine whether it can prevent a security vacuum after UNIFIL’s withdrawal.

We should examine in the EU whether we can ensure that no security vacuum arises with a European mandate following the UNIFIL mission.

The German foreign minister described Lebanon’s current political trajectory under its new government as “one of the most hopeful developments in the region,” suggesting that the evolving political environment offers an opportunity to reshape the international security architecture in southern Lebanon.

According to Wadephul, a European mission could help create the conditions necessary for the Israeli military to complete its withdrawal from southern Lebanon while ensuring that Hezbollah does not re-establish an armed presence in the border area. His remarks reflect broader European efforts to balance support for Lebanon’s sovereignty with Israel’s security concerns amid ongoing regional instability.

Germany’s proposal comes after France and Italy had previously launched efforts in late June 2026 to promote a multinational European-led coalition to succeed UNIFIL, indicating that discussions have moved beyond isolated national initiatives toward broader European strategic planning. During a press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron, Prime Minister (PM) Giorgia Meloni stated

we have decided to launch a coalition to support Lebanon post-UNIFIL, with a view to organizing an international conference in the near future.

Likewise, French FM Jean-Noël Barrot stated that France, with the support of the U.S. and other European partners, particularly Italy, is ready, should the Lebanese authorities seek such assistance, to

mobilize efforts to deploy a framework international coalition in support of the Lebanese Armed Forces.

While European governments increasingly discuss a successor mission, significant uncertainty remains regarding its structure, mandate, and legal framework. Hence, UNIFIL’s departure marks the end of one of the UN’s longest-running peacekeeping missions, but the challenges it leaves behind remain unresolved. A possible successor arrangement may help prevent a security vacuum and establish a sustainable framework for long-term stability.