The Trump administration wants to end the UN peacekeeping in Lebanon. Europe is pushing back
newsday.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 8:18:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S. Elections & Voting Rights, Foreign Policy & International Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations
WASHINGTON -- The future of U.N. peacekeepers in Lebanon has split the United States and its European allies, raising implications for security in the Middle East and becoming the latest snag to vex relations between the U.S. and key partners like France, Britain and Italy.
At issue is the peacekeeping operation known as UNIFIL, whose mandate expires at the end of August and will need to be renewed by the U.N. Security Council to continue. It was created to oversee the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon after Israel's 1978 invasion, and its mission was expanded following the monthlong 2006 war between Israel and the militant group Hezbollah.
The multinational force has played a significant role in monitoring the security situation in southern Lebanon for decades, including during the Israel-Hezbollah war last year, but has drawn criticism from both sides and numerous U.S. lawmakers, some of whom now hold prominent roles in President Donald Trump's administration or wield new influence with the White House.
Trump administration political appointees came into office this year with the aim of shutting down UNIFIL as soon as possible. They regard the operation as an ineffectual waste of money that is merely delaying the goal of eliminating Hezbollah's influence and restoring full security control to the Lebanese Armed Forces that the government says it is not yet capable of doing.
After securing major cuts in U.S. funding to the peacekeeping force, Secretary of State Marco Rubio signed off early last week on a plan that would wind down and end UNIFIL in the next six months, according to Trump administration officials and congressional aides familiar with the discussions.
It's another step as the Trump administration drastically pares back its foreign affairs priorities and budget, including expressing skepticism of international alliances and cutting funding to U.N. agencies and missions. The transatlantic divide also has been apparent on issues ranging from Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza and the Russia-Ukraine conflict to trade, technology and free speech issues.
Israel has for years sought an end to UNIFIL's mandate, and renewal votes have often come after weeks of political wrangling. Now, the stakes are particularly high after last year's war and more vigorous opposition in Washington.
European nations, notably France and Italy, have objected to winding down UNIFIL. With the support of Tom Barrack, U.S. ambassador to Turkey and envoy to Lebanon, they successfully lobbied Rubio and others to support a one-year extension of the peacekeeping mandate followed by a time-certain wind-down period of six months, according to the administration officials and congressional aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private diplomatic negotiations.
Israel also reluctantly agreed to an extension, they said.
The European argument was that prematurely ending UNIFIL before the Lebanese army is able to fully secure the border area would create a vacuum that Hezbollah could easily exploit.
The French noted that when a U.N. peacekeeping mission in Mali was terminated before government troops were ready to deal with security threats, Islamic extremists moved in.
With the U.S. easing off, the issue ahead of the U.N. vote expected at the end of August now appears to be resistance by France and others to setting a firm deadline for the operation to end after the one-year extension, according to the officials and congressional aides.
French officials did not respond to requests for comment.
The final French draft resolution, obtained by The Associated Press, does not include a date for UNIFIL's withdrawal, which U.S. officials say is required for their support. Instead, it would extend the peacekeeping mission for one year and indicates the U.N. Security Council's "intention to work on a withdrawal."
But even if the mandate is renewed, the peacekeeping mission might be scaled down for financial reasons, with the U.N. system likely facing drastic budget cuts, said a U.N. official, who was not authorized to comment to the media and spoke on condition of anonymity.
One of the U.S. officials said an option being considered was reducing UNIFIL's numbers while boosting its technological means to monitor the situation on the ground.
There are about 10,000 peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, while the Lebanese army has around 6,000 soldiers, a number that is supposed to increase to 10,000.
Hezbollah supporters in Lebanon have frequently accused the U.N. mission of collusion with Israel and sometimes attacked peacekeepers on patrol. Israel, meanwhile, has accused the peacekeepers of turning a blind eye to Hezbollah's military activities in southern Lebanon and lobbied for its mandate to end.
Sarit Zehavi, a former Israeli military intelligence analyst and founder of the Israeli think tank Alma Research and Education Center, said UNIFIL has played a "damaging role with regard to the mission of disarming Hezbollah in south Lebanon."
She pointed to the discovery of Hezbollah tunnels and weapons caches close to UNIFIL facilities during and after last year's Israel-Hezbollah war, when much of the militant group's senior leadership was killed and much of its arsenal destroyed. Hezbollah is now under increasing pressure to give up the rest of its weapons.
U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said UNIFIL continues to discover unauthorized weapons, including rocket launchers, mortar rounds and bomb fuses, this week, which it reported to the Lebanese army.
Under the U.S.- and France-brokered ceasefire, Israel and Hezbollah were to withdraw from southern Lebanon, with the Lebanese army taking control in conjunction with UNIFIL. Israel has continued to occupy five strategic points on the Lebanese side and carry out near-daily airstrikes that it says aim to stop Hezbollah from regrouping.
Lebanese officials have called for UNIFIL to remain, saying the country's cash-strapped and overstretched army is not yet able to patrol the full area on its own until it.
Retired Lebanese Army Gen. Khalil Helou said that if UNIFIL's mandate were to abruptly end, soldiers would need to be pulled away from the porous border with Syria, where smuggling is rife, or from other areas inside of Lebanon -- "and this could have consequences for the stability" of the country.
UNIFIL "is maybe not fulfilling 100% what the Western powers or Israel desire. But for Lebanon, their presence is important," he said.
The United Nations also calls the peacekeepers critical to regional stability, Dujarric said.
UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti said deciding on the renewal of the mandate is the prerogative of the U.N. Security Council.
"We are here to assist the parties in implementation of the mission's mandate and we're waiting for the final decision," he said.
Sign Our PetitionThe recent developments surrounding the potential termination of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) under the Trump administration serve as a vivid illustration of the complex interplay between U.S. foreign policy, international alliances, and regional security dynamics. Established in 1978 following Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, UNIFIL was designed to facilitate peace and monitor the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon. This operation has been crucial in maintaining a fragile balance in the region, especially during the violent escalations that occurred during the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah. The push by the Trump administration to wind down UNIFIL not only reflects a broader trend of skepticism towards multilateral institutions but also raises significant questions about the future of stability in the Middle East.
Historically, U.S. foreign policy has oscillated between supporting international peacekeeping efforts and unilateral military interventions. The current administration's inclination to sever ties with UNIFIL resonates with a growing nationalist sentiment that prioritizes American interests at the expense of long-standing diplomatic relationships and commitments. This approach is further complicated by the fact that key European allies, such as France and Italy, have recognized the vital role UNIFIL plays in mitigating conflict and protecting civilians in Lebanon. Their advocacy for a one-year extension of UNIFIL's mandate underscores the belief that international cooperation is essential for addressing complex geopolitical challenges, even when it may be politically unpopular in the U.S. This divide highlights a broader ideological rift that questions the effectiveness of NATO and other transatlantic alliances in an era marked by rising populism and isolationism.
The implications of potentially dismantling UNIFIL extend beyond Lebanon's borders and into the intricate tapestry of Middle Eastern politics. Hezbollah, a militant group with a significant presence in Lebanon, has historically positioned itself as a defender against Israeli aggression. By removing the oversight and monitoring capabilities provided by UNIFIL, the U.S. risks exacerbating tensions in a region that has already seen devastating conflicts and humanitarian crises. Critics of the Trump administration's approach argue that this move is not merely about reducing costs but rather a misguided attempt to appease Israeli interests while overlooking the complex realities on the ground. The end of UNIFIL could lead to a power vacuum that might empower Hezbollah and destabilize Lebanon further, potentially igniting broader regional conflicts.
Moreover, this situation draws parallel to ongoing social struggles globally, where the abandonment of international support mechanisms often leads to dire humanitarian consequences. The debate over UNIFIL encapsulates broader questions surrounding the responsibility of powerful nations to protect vulnerable populations and maintain peace. The juxtaposition of U.S. actions with the European commitment to UN peacekeeping initiatives illustrates a fundamental divergence in how different nations perceive their roles on the world stage. While the U.S. administration may view peacekeeping as an unnecessary expenditure, European nations recognize it as an investment in global stability and a moral obligation to support those affected by war and conflict.
As the U.S. grapples with its foreign policy direction, it is imperative for activists and advocates for peace to articulate the historical context and humanitarian implications of these decisions. Engaging in conversations about the role of international peacekeeping forces like UNIFIL can serve as a critical touchpoint for addressing broader themes related to nationalism, international cooperation, and social justice. By framing the narrative around the potential consequences of dismantling peacekeeping efforts, advocates can effectively challenge the prevailing rhetoric of austerity in foreign aid and emphasize the interconnectedness of global security. Ultimately, the fate of UNIFIL should provoke a deeper reflection on the values that guide our foreign policy and the necessity of collaborative approaches to achieving lasting peace and justice in the world.
The recent push by the Trump administration to end the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) represents a significant pivot in U.S. foreign policy and raises critical questions about international cooperation, security, and the responsibilities of global powers. The UNIFIL operation was established in the aftermath of Israel's 1978 invasion of Lebanon, with the intention of monitoring and maintaining peace in a region that has long been marred by conflict. As the mandate for UNIFIL comes up for renewal, the divide between the U.S. and its European allies—particularly France and Italy—underscores the growing tensions in transatlantic relations and the implications for Middle Eastern stability.
Historically, international peacekeeping operations have been viewed as essential tools for managing conflicts and preventing further violence. UNIFIL's role has been especially critical in the context of the Israel-Hezbollah conflict, which saw intense escalation during the 2006 war. By monitoring the southern Lebanon border and facilitating a fragile peace, UNIFIL has contributed to a degree of stability in a region characterized by sectarian strife and geopolitical rivalries. The Trump administration’s skepticism towards multilateral institutions, however, reflects a broader trend that prioritizes unilateral action and American exceptionalism over collective global responsibility. This ideology risks undermining decades of diplomatic progress and compromises the efficacy of international mechanisms designed to promote peace and security.
The implications of winding down UNIFIL extend beyond Lebanon, as they could set a precedent for other international peacekeeping missions. Critics of the Trump administration's stance often cite the historical context of withdrawal from international commitments, which can lead to power vacuums and increased violence. The U.S. has a responsibility not only to uphold its commitments but also to engage constructively with international partners to address global challenges. The ongoing support for UNIFIL from European nations highlights a divergent understanding of the importance of international cooperation. While the U.S. administration views peacekeeping as a financial burden, European allies see it as a vital investment in regional stability.
As concerned citizens, we must be proactive in addressing this critical issue. Engaging in discussions with our representatives can help raise awareness about the importance of maintaining UNIFIL and supporting peacekeeping efforts more broadly. Advocacy can take many forms, from writing letters to elected officials to participating in local forums that address foreign policy. Furthermore, educating ourselves and others about the historical and political context surrounding UNIFIL and its role in stabilizing Lebanon can create a more informed electorate. When discussing these issues with those who may hold opposing views, it’s essential to emphasize the long-term benefits of peacekeeping, not just for the region but for international security as a whole.
In conclusion, the potential dismantling of UNIFIL by the Trump administration signals a troubling shift in U.S. foreign policy, one marked by isolationist tendencies and a disregard for established international norms. As Americans, we have a duty to advocate for a comprehensive approach to foreign affairs that values collaboration, peace, and the constructive engagement of global institutions. By taking action and fostering dialogue, we can work towards a future where peacekeeping operations like UNIFIL are seen not as liabilities but as essential components of a stable and secure world. It is incumbent upon us to ensure that our voices are heard in support of international cooperation and to challenge narratives that undermine the vital work of peacekeeping forces around the globe.
In light of the recent developments regarding the potential end of the UN peacekeeping mission in Lebanon (UNIFIL), there are several actionable steps individuals can take to advocate for continued international support and peacekeeping efforts in the region. Here’s a detailed list of ideas and actions:
### What Can We Personally Do About This?
1. **Educate Yourself and Others**: Start by understanding the complexities of the situation in Lebanon, the role of UNIFIL, and the broader implications for regional stability. Share this knowledge with your community, friends, and family to raise awareness about the importance of peacekeeping missions.
2. **Support Advocacy Organizations**: Contribute to or volunteer with organizations focused on peace and humanitarian efforts in the Middle East. These organizations often have campaigns that you can get involved with.
### Exact Actions to Take
1. **Petitions**: - **Create or Sign Petitions**: Use platforms like Change.org to initiate or support petitions urging the U.S. government to continue funding and supporting UNIFIL. For example, creating a petition titled "Support Continued UN Peacekeeping in Lebanon" can rally others around this cause. - **Example Petition**: Search for existing petitions related to UNIFIL on Change.org and sign them. You can also create your own with a clear message about why UN peacekeeping is essential for Lebanon's stability.
2. **Contact Elected Officials**: - **Write to Your Representatives**: - **U.S. Senators and Representatives**: Find your local representatives through the official U.S. Congress website. Write letters or send emails expressing your support for UNIFIL and urging them to advocate for its renewal. - Example Template: ``` Dear [Senator/Representative] [Name], I am writing to express my concern regarding the Trump administration's proposal to end the UN peacekeeping mission in Lebanon (UNIFIL). This mission plays a crucial role in maintaining stability and security in the region. I urge you to advocate for the renewal of UNIFIL's mandate and ensure continued U.S. support for peacekeeping efforts. Thank you for your attention to this important issue. Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [Your Email] ```
- **Key Contacts**: - **Senator Marco Rubio** (Chair, Senate Foreign Relations Committee) - Email: https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact - Mailing Address: 284 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510 - **Senator Bob Menendez** (Ranking Member, Senate Foreign Relations Committee) - Email: https://www.menendez.senate.gov/contact - Mailing Address: 528 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20510 - **Your Local Member of Congress**: Find contact information through the U.S. House of Representatives website.
3. **Engage on Social Media**: Use platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram to raise awareness about the importance of UNIFIL. Tag your representatives in posts and use hashtags like #SupportUNIFIL or #PeaceInLebanon to increase visibility.
4. **Organize or Join Local Events**: Participate in or organize community forums, discussions, or rallies that focus on international peacekeeping efforts. Partner with local advocacy groups that align with your message.
5. **Write Op-Eds or Letters to the Editor**: Share your viewpoint in local newspapers or online publications to influence public opinion and encourage others to support peacekeeping missions.
6. **Support Humanitarian Aid Initiatives**: Contribute to organizations that provide aid to Lebanon, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross or Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders). Your support can help those affected by instability and conflict.
By taking these actions, you can contribute to a broader movement advocating for the continuation of essential peacekeeping efforts in Lebanon and help foster a more stable and secure Middle East.