Lebanon: Consultations on Resolution 1559*
On Monday morning (14 October), Council members are expected to receive a briefing in closed consultations on the Secretary-General’s latest report on the implementation of resolution 1559 (S/2024/723), which was circulated to Council members on 8 October. Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo is the anticipated briefer.
While Monday’s meeting is the regular semi-annual briefing on resolution 1559, it follows several recent Security Council meetings focusing on the rapidly intensifying conflict between Israel and Hezbollah and the deteriorating situation in the wider Middle East, including in Gaza and Israel. (For background, see the briefs on Lebanon and “The Middle East, including the Palestinian Question” in our October 2024 Monthly Forecast as well as our 8 October What’s in Blue story.)
Adopted in 2004, resolution 1559 called for strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of Lebanon under “the sole and exclusive authority” of the government of Lebanon. It called on foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon and for the disbanding and disarming of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias. It also expressed the Security Council’s support for the extension of the Lebanese government’s control over all of Lebanon’s territory.
On Monday, DiCarlo may note that, although more than 20 years have passed since the adoption of resolution 1559 and the context on the ground has changed, the resolution remains highly relevant under currently escalating hostilities. She might observe, however, that several elements called for by the resolution remain pending.
DiCarlo is likely to note that Lebanese and non-Lebanese armed groups continue to operate in Lebanon outside the control of the state, with Hezbollah remaining the most heavily armed militia. The Secretary-General’s report on the implementation of resolution 1559, which covers developments between 18 April and 16 September, highlights that Hezbollah and other militias have “repeatedly demonstrated their military capabilities” through strikes from southern Lebanon into Israel, with “increasingly advanced anti-tank guided missiles, artillery, offensive drones, mortars, rockets, and surface-to-air missiles used in such strikes”. DiCarlo is likely to stress that the presence of weaponry outside the control of the Lebanese government undermines Lebanon’s security and its ability to exercise full sovereignty over its territory. She may welcome Lebanon’s announcement in August regarding its intention to recruit additional personnel to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) to consolidate the state’s control over its territory and might emphasise the importance of increasing international support to the LAF. At the same time, DiCarlo may stress the need for Lebanon to increase its efforts to achieve a monopoly over the use of force and prohibit Hezbollah and other groups from acquiring weapons.
While at the time of the adoption of resolution 1559 the focus of the Council’s call for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Lebanon was on Syrian forces, DiCarlo may note on Monday that, since 1 October, Israel has been carrying out ground operations in southern Lebanon in violation of Lebanese sovereignty. The Secretary-General’s report does not cover developments regarding Israel’s ground operations in Lebanon, as they began after the report’s cut-off date. But it highlights that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) continued to violate Lebanon’s sovereignty by entering Lebanese airspace and describes numerous airstrikes conducted by Israel in Lebanon during the reporting period. The report also says that Israel continues to occupy the northern part of Ghajar, a village which straddles the Blue Line, and an adjacent area north of the Blue Line, in violation of Lebanon’s sovereignty. (The Blue Line is a withdrawal line set by the UN in 2000 to confirm the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon. While not representing an international border, the Blue Line acts in practice as a boundary between Israel and Lebanon in the absence of an agreed-upon border between the two states.)
Consistent with their calls during a 10 October Security Council meeting on the situation in Lebanon, DiCarlo and most Council members are likely to underscore on Monday that Israel must end its bombardment of Lebanon and withdraw its ground forces, and that Hezbollah must stop firing into Israel. More generally, participants may stress the urgent need for all parties to recommit to a return to a cessation of hostilities and the full implementation of resolutions 1559 and 1701. (In 2006, resolution 1701 called for a cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah.)
The US, Israel’s key ally on the Security Council and its main supplier of armaments, has said that it supports “Israel’s efforts to degrade” Hezbollah, while also stating that “ultimately” it wants to see a diplomatic solution to the conflict. Although the US was among a group of states that on 25 September called for a 21-day ceasefire “across the Lebanon-Israel border to provide space for diplomacy”, it did not call for such a measure during the Council’s 10 October meeting. It has also apparently opposed language calling for de-escalation and a cessation of hostilities in recent Council negotiations on draft products on Lebanon. The US has instead emphasised that the Council should concentrate on condemning Hezbollah for its attacks on Israel, and Iran for providing Hezbollah with “financial and material support”. (Iran is Hezbollah’s main arms supplier.)
Resolution 1559 also expressed support for a free and fair electoral process for Lebanon’s presidential elections. At Monday’s meeting, some members may note that Lebanon has been without a president for almost two years since Michel Aoun’s term ended on 31 October 2022, as opposing political-sectarian blocks have been unable to agree on a candidate. The presidential vacuum is compounded by the fact that, over two years since the 15 May 2022 legislative elections, Lebanon’s government remains in caretaker status. Council members may note that the executive power vacuum and the pre-existing economic crisis in Lebanon might hamper its ability to support the civilian population affected by the escalating conflict, with the hostilities likely exacerbating the country’s difficult economic situation. These members may emphasise the need to support humanitarian initiatives, such as the $426 million flash appeal recently launched by the UN and the Lebanese government.
While developments concerning the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) are generally not the focus of meetings on resolution 1559, it is likely that at Monday’s meeting members will address the increasingly difficult situation that the peacekeeping force is facing. In a 10 October statement, UNIFIL reported that two peacekeepers were injured after an IDF tank “fired its weapon toward an observation tower at UNIFIL’s headquarters in Naqoura”. IDF soldiers also fired on two other UN positions, hitting the entrance of a bunker where peacekeepers were sheltering and disabling perimeter-monitoring cameras at one such position, according to the statement. On 11 October, UNIFIL said that two peacekeepers were injured after two explosions occurred close to a UNIFIL observation tower. A joint statement issued on the same day by France, Italy, and Spain, the largest European troop-contributing countries to UNIFIL, condemned the “recent targeting of UNIFIL by the IDF”.
Israel has recently urged UNIFIL to move from its positions, stating that this is to avoid danger. However, these warnings have raised concerns regarding “the prospect of Israel launching a full-scale invasion” in southern Lebanon, with some commentators noting that a withdrawal of UNIFIL troops would leave no impartial observers in that event. In a 2 October statement, Spokesperson for the Secretary-General Stéphane Dujarric said that, in response to Israel’s request, a decision was made both “operationally and politically” for UNIFIL to stay in its positions. At the 10 October Council meeting, Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations Jean-Pierre Lacroix explained that UNIFIL has adopted mitigating measures, including reducing the mission’s footprint by 25 percent “at the most affected UN positions” and temporarily relocating peacekeepers to larger bases in UNIFIL’s area of operations, while continuing to re-assess the force’s posture against “prevailing risks”.
On Monday, Council members are expected to express concern at the recent attacks on UNIFIL and underscore that all parties must guarantee the safety and security of UNIFIL personnel and premises. Council members are also likely to express concern about the rising number of civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian infrastructure. On 11 October, the Council’s ten elected members (E10) issued a press statement highlighting these and other issues. It appears that the E10 statement was based on draft press elements proposed by France after the 10 October meeting, on which Council members were unable to agree. While the US had apparently accepted a version of the press elements calling for “a diplomatic solution that fully implements” resolution 1701, it seems that Russia opposed this formulation, arguing that resolution 1701 already represents such a solution.
________________________________________________________________
**Post-script (14 October, 10 am EST): After the story’s publication, France requested additional closed consultations focusing on the situation of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). The meeting was scheduled for Monday afternoon (14 October), with Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations Jean-Pierre Lacroix as the anticipated briefer.
