Photo montage par Guilhelm Dorandeu
BEIRUT: The United Nations Security Security Council voted on Thursday to extend the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) for another year, until Aug. 31, 2024.
Lebanon and Hezbollah had pushed to make changes to Article 16 in the mandate to limit UNIFIL’s ability to move around without the permission of the Lebanese Army — but no amendment was made in the final text. This year’s renewal of the UN's peacekeeping force comes amid rising tensions along the Lebanese-Israeli border.
Here are 5 key things you need to know about the mandate renewal:
1. The votes
13 countries voted in favor of resolution 2695, with Russia and China abstaining.
This differs from last year's renewal, when members of the UN Security Council voted unanimously to extend the mandate.
The vote comes after recent pressure from the Lebanese government and Hezbollah to remove Article 16, regarding the free movement of UNIFIL.
UNIFIL, which currently numbers just over 10,000 peacekeepers, was established in 1978 by the Security Council to confirm the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon. Its mandate is renewed each year, after approval by Lebanese authorities and a vote by the Security Council.
2. What does the text say?
The key takeaway is that Lebanon's demands to limit the freedom of movement of UNIFIL were not met in the final resolution. UNIFIL can continue to "conduct its operation independently," according to the approved Resolution 2695, published by the UN.
However, the text does state that UNIFIL should "coordinate with the Government of Lebanon."
In response to this point, Lebanon's caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati said in a statement published shortly after the vote: "The extension decision includes a fundamental clause that Lebanon had requested, which concerns UNIFIL carrying out its duties in coordination with the Lebanese government, in accordance with the headquarters agreement. This in itself constitutes a factor of satisfaction."
The text also demands that all parties should allow peacekeepers to conduct "announced and unannounced patrols" without "any restrictions and hindrances to the movement of UNIFIL personnel and guarantee the freedom of movement of UNIFIL."
3. Abstentions by China and Russia
For the first time, two members of the Security Council abstained from voting — China and Russia.
A representative for Russia said the text did not "take into consideration the opinion of Lebanon and its leadership who have repeatedly said there needs to be coordination between UNIFIL, and the armed forces."
China said that the resolution failed to address the Lebanese point of view. "China regrets the lack of respect to sovereignty that the resolution shows," its representative said.
"Lebanon has on many occasions sent letters to the Security Council on breaches of sovereignty along the border and the Security Council should take those letters seriously," the representative added.
4. Reaction of the United Arab Emirates
The UAE voted for the renewal, but said it was not entirely happy with the final wording of the text.
"Hezbollah has made a mockery of resolution 1701 and has not allowed freedom of movement for UNIFIL which obstructs stability on the blue line," stated Lana Nusseibeh, ambassador and permanent representative for the UAE during the council meeting.
In the final version, the UAE's request to change the wording of a sentence regarding the border-straddling town of Ghajar was not taken into account.
The UAE reportedly proposed that part of the text be amended to say the UN “condemns the occupation” of Ghajar. But the preamble of the agreed text states that the UN is concerned about "the continued Israeli presence in northern Ghajar and an adjacent area north of the Blue Line," and emphasizes "that the continuation of construction work in the area goes against the necessary withdrawal of Israeli defense forces.”
"We are disappointed with the needless compromise to remove the unqualified reference to the Israeli occupation of Al-Ghajar, which was in previous drafts and, we think, enjoyed widespread support in this Council," added Nusseibeh.
5. Reaction from Hezbollah and Israel
A Hezbollah spokesperson told L’Orient Today that the passing of this resolution portrays “the failure of the Lebanese diplomacy that should have prepared early on to face this resolution.”
“This also shows that the world did not listen to Lebanon’s needs. When the US and Israel want something from the Security Council, they get it, simply because they have hegemony over the Security Council.”
“We ask UNIFIL to remain in complete coordination with the Lebanese armed forces before carrying out any mission or else this resolution will remain, as Hezbollah’s leader [Hassan Nasrallah] says, 'ink on paper' [meaning ineffective].”
Israel had been pushing to maintain Article 16 on the freedom of movement of UNIFIL without prior permission from the Lebanese Army.
In reaction to the vote Israel Defense Forces tweeted "UNIFIL is fundamental in helping maintain stability in the region."
It comes after Israel's Defense Minister Yoav Gallant spoke with the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Tuesday and stressed the need for UNIFIL to be able to "act independently in South Lebanon" and to be able to move freely near the borders in order to decrease tension.