According to Security Council resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978) of 19 March 1978, UNIFIL was established to:
- Confirm the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon.
- Restore international peace and security.
- Assist the Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its effective authority in
the area.
According to Security Council resolution 1701 (2006) of 11 August 2006, UNIFIL, in addition to carrying out its mandate under resolutions 425 and 426, shall:
- Monitor the cessation of hostilities.
- Accompany and support the Lebanese armed forces as they deploy throughout the South, including along the Blue Line, as Israel withdraws its armed forces from Lebanon.
- Coordinate its activities referred to in the preceding paragraph (above) with the Government of Lebanon and the Government of Israel.
- Extend its assistance to help ensure humanitarian access to civilian populations and the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons.
- Assist the Lebanese armed forces in taking steps towards the establishment between the Blue Line and the Litani river of an area free of any armed personnel, assets and weapons other than those of the Government of Lebanon and of UNIFIL deployed in this area.
- Assist the Government of Lebanon, at its request, in securing its borders and other entry points to prevent the entry in Lebanon without its consent of arms or related materiel.
By this resolution, the Council also authorized UNIFIL to take all necessary action in areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities, to ensure that its area of operations is not utilized for hostile activities of any kind; to resist attempts by forceful means to prevent it from discharging its duties under the mandate of the Security Council; and to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers and, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of Lebanon, to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence
Well, the Israeli forces withdrew. But the Lebanese Government hasn’t been in control of any part of that area in Southern Lebanon since the original resolutions in 1978. In fact, it’s questionable whether the central Lebanese government is in control of any part of Lebanon. The real ruler on the ground is the Shi’ite militia of Hizbullah. The head of that organization is Hassan Nasrallah. He is a de facto puppet of the Iranian mullahs, but with enough power to act as if he is independent.
How does UNIFIL action, or lack thereof, look in light of what has happened recently? To start with, Hizbullah sent organized armed military units to fight in Syria alongside the forces supporting Bashar Al-Assad. Does that mean that UNIFIL should allow such activity? Their mandate says they should oppose “hostile activities of any kind”. Iran has been sending advanced armaments to Hizbullah via the Beirut International Airport. Some of the weaponry has even been stored near the airport. Is it possible that arms that are being sent to South Lebanon in this way should be allowed entry because Beirut is not in South Lebanon? If Beirut is not within the jurisdiction of UNIFIL why aren’t those weapons being halted when they are moved to the South? Finally, Hizbullah has been digging tunnels from Lebanese territory into Israel. UNIFIL commanders have been shown the results of their lax attitude toward such behavior. They are located in Lebanon to prevent precisely such behavior.
Security council resolutions are NOT advisory opinions only. UNIFIL is composed of military units that ought to act to prevent any real violent confrontation across that border. All the violations are taking place on the Northern side of the border. When the next round of fighting occurs will UNIFIL cut and run like their counterparts did in 1973?
Wetherhorn 