UN Peacekeeping in Lebanon: A Case Study

Peacekeeping in Lebanon depends on a sound political base, a well-defined mandate and objectives as well as the cooperation of the parties concerned. However, in discussions about the international force for Lebanon in 2006, these issues were overlooked. Finding a quick solution became the overriding consideration. This study, by the Irish Centre for Human Rights, argues that the current UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) has to overcome serious obstacles in order to achieve its mandate. These are linked to broader political and security issues that need immediate attention in order to resolve the problems confronting Lebanon as a whole.

Israel’s actions in south Lebanon during 2006 could reignite long-simmering religious and political tensions there. Civil war, not unlike that which broke out in April 1975 between Christian factions and leftist Muslim Lebanese supported by the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), remains a very real prospect. The prompt international response then is in stark contrast with that of the July 2006 crisis. During the 1970s when the UNIFIL mandate proved impractical, the de facto mission of the Force became the provision of a secure environment for the local population. Its ultimate success in achieving this goal vindicated the role of traditional peacekeeping. Today, lessons have not been learned from the situation where the UN was called upon to fulfill a range of impossible and confused tasks.