After a concerted effort by the US and Israel, the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) is scheduled to be disbanded in 2027 following a vote on the UN Security Council to renew its mandate for “the last time.”
For 47 years, the international coalition of troops, including over 30,000 members of Óglaigh na hÉireann, the Irish Army, has stationed 50 bases across the south of Lebanon, aiding both the civilian population and the Lebanese government. UNIFIL troops are involved in everything from disarming landmines and seizing weapons from Hezbollah, to building wells and distributing aid to a region wracked by repeated Israeli invasions and occupations.
Just days ago, while UNIFIL soldiers were clearing a road in south Lebanon, Israeli drones dropped grenades on their position in yet another escalation to attempt to further discourage international support for Lebanon. A UNFIL spokesperson called it “one of the most serious attacks on UNIFIL personnel and assets since the cessation of hostilities agreement of last November” in a statement on September 3rd.
Now, with the region again devastated by the aftermath of Israel’s invasion last year and the severely underequipped and inexperienced Lebanese Armed Forces relying on UNIFIL to carry out the US-mandated disarmament of Hezbollah, the mission is set to be scaled back and abandoned altogether.
In a statement following the decision by the security council, Tánaiste Simon Harris said that he accepts the decision with a “heavy heart,” and that while he supported a more long-term plan for withdrawal supported by France, “the situation on the ground is stable but fragile.” Meanwhile, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun painted a different picture ahead of the vote, saying it would “negatively impact the situation in the South,” and following the vote, stressed the importance of an Israeli withdrawal from the Lebanese territories it occupies and the release of Lebanese detainees in Israeli prisons. While the UN Security Council resolution calling for the final renewal of UNIFIL’s mandate did include a call for Israel to withdraw from the territories in Lebanon which it occupies, it provided no plan or enforcement mechanism for the accomplishment of this goal, while detainees are ignored entirely.
As for the future of Ireland in Lebanon, the Tánaiste has proposed a new military mission in Lebanon under the EU’s umbrella, modelled on the EU’s Military Assistance Mission in Ukraine (EUMAM). This mission, established in 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, sought to provide the Ukrainian Armed Forces with training in EU countries on the usage of new weapons systems provided by EU member states. However, unlike Ukraine, Lebanese troops are not likely to be easily transported to European countries to be trained. Furthermore, the little military assistance that the EU has granted to Lebanon is largely obsolete and the primary issues facing the Lebanese Armed Forces seem to not be of training, but of funding, equipment, and force multiplication, all of which will be no doubt exacerbated by the end of UNIFIL. Lebanese soldiers’ salaries are paid through money from the US and Qatar, with soldiers being paid less than $100 a week and forced to be released from service to work part-time jobs to supplement these sub-poverty-level pay rates, according to DPA International.
This new plan is unlikely to include solutions to these systemic issues in troop morale and readiness, with France insisting upon “required financial and economic reforms” prior to further support for the near-nonexistent Lebanese economy, which has shrunk by 38 per cent over the past five years. This has led institutions like the International Monetary Fund to stop publishing economic data on Lebanon altogether. Ireland has, in recent years, provided roughly €12.5 million in humanitarian aid to Lebanon, but has done little to assist in its debt crisis. Much of the humanitarian aid that is funded by Lebanon is carried out by UNIFIL troops that would be withdrawn, whereas any new deployment would likely be limited to Beirut, Lebanon’s capital.
What this eventual Irish plan for Lebanon will look like is impossible to know, with details likely to be revealed in the coming weeks and months. This plan will also likely need to change as the disarmament of Hezbollah progresses, the plan for this is set to be released publicly by the Lebanese government following a September 2nd cabinet meeting. According to sources within the Lebanese government spoken to by L’Orient-Le Jour, an English/French language daily paper in Lebanon, the plan is still quite controversial with “those involved [having] agreed on 90 per cent” of its content. What appears to be the largest point of contention in the plan is the inclusion of a process by which former Hezbollah fighters without criminal records will be integrated into the Lebanese Army, a move which could bolster the 80,000 man, largely green force with at least 10,000 of the most experienced fighters in the region. For supporters of the plan, this is intended to provide an incentive for individual soldiers and battalions to not resist disarmament, as they can be confident it will not result in joblessness or the abrogation of what was perhaps many militants’ primary motivation for joining Hezbollah: the desire to protect their communities. Meanwhile, critics see this as a capitulation to the militant group and its members, whom many outside of the Shia community blame for the nation’s international isolation and repeated invasions by Israel. In the eyes of some moderates like Walid Joumblatt, the former leader of the majority-Druze Progressive Socialist Party, these sort of concessions are necessary to achieve disarmament as the state is not strong enough to make unilateral demands.
The current situation poses a dilemma for Western opponents of Hezbollah like Ireland and the EU, whether to embrace compromise as a means for lasting peace or to provide the material and diplomatic support necessary to ensure the group’s total capitulation. As Ireland recalibrates its policy towards Lebanon in a post-UNIFIL era, the choice between an open hand and a clenched fist will gain even greater importance as regional alignments are thrown to the wind in the wake of Israel’s genocide.
