A building destroyed in the southern suburbs of Beirut after an Israeli strike, June 5, 2025. (Credit: Mohammad Yassin/L'Orient-Le Jour)
The report published Sunday in the Israeli press, stating that Washington and Tel Aviv have agreed not to renew the mandate of the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in August, is cause for concern for several reasons. First, the Blue Helmets support the Lebanese Army in its efforts to dismantle Hezbollah’s arsenal south of the Litani River, in accordance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701.However, the most serious risk, according to observers, would be that UNIFIL’s withdrawal might grant Israel (even more) free rein in its military activities. This could allow it to reoccupy a large part of southern Lebanon, in a scenario reminiscent of 1982. Unless, of course, this report is yet another mere maneuver aimed at increasing pressure on the Lebanese government to push it to approve an expansion of the UNIFIL mandate and to...
The report published Sunday in the Israeli press, stating that Washington and Tel Aviv have agreed not to renew the mandate of the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in August, is cause for concern for several reasons. First, the Blue Helmets support the Lebanese Army in its efforts to dismantle Hezbollah’s arsenal south of the Litani River, in accordance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701.However, the most serious risk, according to observers, would be that UNIFIL’s withdrawal might grant Israel (even more) free rein in its military activities. This could allow it to reoccupy a large part of southern Lebanon, in a scenario reminiscent of 1982. Unless, of course, this report is yet another mere maneuver aimed at increasing pressure on the Lebanese government to push it to approve an expansion of the UNIFIL mandate and...
