Accountability for Crimes against Peacekeepers: Vote on a Draft Resolution*
On Tuesday morning (23 June), the Security Council is expected to vote on a draft resolution on accountability for crimes committed against UN peacekeepers. The draft text was authored by Denmark and Pakistan, who have worked together as a “peacekeeping duo”, having made peacekeeping a key priority during their 2025-2026 tenure on the Security Council. The draft resolution is open for co-sponsorship from the wider UN membership, with at least 100 member states having co-sponsored the text at the time of writing.
Background
While the safety and security of peacekeepers remain a major concern for Council members, some members apparently feel that accountability for attacks against personnel serving in UN peace operations has not received the attention it warrants as a standalone issue. In light of the increase in the number and sophistication of attacks against UN peacekeepers, the issue has prompted renewed discussion within the Council.
As peacekeepers operate in increasingly complex and volatile conflict environments, they face growing threats from armed groups, terrorist attacks, indirect fire, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), and emerging technologies such as drones. According to the UN, since 1948, nearly 4,500 peacekeepers have lost their lives in the line of duty, including 59 fatalities in 2025 alone.
Recently, a series of attacks affecting UN peacekeepers across several contexts highlighted the growing risks they face and increased interest among Council members to address the issue.
In southern Lebanon, the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) has been operating in precarious conditions since hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah resumed in March. Seven UNIFIL peacekeepers have lost their lives in four separate incidents in the past three months. In March, two Indonesian peacekeepers were killed and two others injured when an explosion hit a UN logistics convoy. The incident occurred just one day after another Indonesian peacekeeper was killed when a projectile struck a UN position in the same area. In April, a French peacekeeper was killed and three others injured when a UN patrol came under fire. More recently, on 4 June, a Serbian UNIFIL peacekeeper lost his life after mortar shells struck a UN position.
In December 2025, a drone attack targeting a UN logistics base in Kadugli, the capital of South Kordofan state in Sudan, killed six Bangladeshi peacekeepers serving with the UN Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA).
Security Council members typically respond to attacks against peacekeepers by issuing press statements condemning the incidents and calling for prompt investigations to ensure accountability, as was also the case with the above-mentioned incidents. However, there appears to be a persistent gap between the reporting of these crimes and efforts to bring perpetrators to justice. It seems that some Council members feel that the limited accountability for crimes committed against peacekeepers has contributed to a culture of impunity, which in turn continues to undermine the safety and security of peacekeepers.
In proposing their draft resolution, Denmark and Pakistan apparently sought to move the Council beyond merely condemning attacks by establishing a more institutionalised follow-up mechanism to enable it to remain seized of developments, including efforts to establish facts, pursue investigations, and ensure accountability. It seems that these members highlighted the absence of a dedicated mechanism within the UN Secretariat to systematically monitor such cases and support efforts to investigate and prosecute perpetrators. Additionally, Denmark and Pakistan apparently argued that regular reporting on the issue will not only enable the Security Council to follow up on actions taken to investigate and prosecute such crimes, but to also shed more light on ongoing investigations. More broadly, they apparently aimed to send a strong political signal underscoring the Council’s commitment to the safety and security of peacekeepers and highlighting the importance of investigating and prosecuting crimes committed against such personnel, not only to deliver justice to the victims but also to deter future attacks and to address the culture of impunity that continues to endanger peacekeepers in the field.
The Security Council has previously adopted several presidential statements and resolutions that addressed the safety and security of UN peacekeepers. Resolution 2518, which was spearheaded by China and adopted in March 2020, was the Council’s first standalone resolution dedicated to improving the safety and security of peacekeepers. It focused on strengthening operational preparedness, enhancing situational awareness, and addressing the evolving threats faced by peacekeepers. Subsequently, resolution 2589, which was authored by India and adopted in August 2021, placed a particular emphasis on promoting accountability cooperation among member states in investigating and prosecuting crimes against UN peacekeepers. (For more information, see our 29 March 2020 and 17 August 2021 What’s in Blue stories.) The Denmark-Pakistan draft resolution builds on these products but focuses solely on accountability and includes recent developments, including the increase in attacks against peacekeepers.
Negotiations on the Draft Resolution
Ahead of the negotiations, Denmark and Pakistan apparently informally consulted with Council members and the UN Secretariat on their initiative, which received broad support from most Council members. The co-penholders circulated the zero draft of the resolution on 13 May and convened one round of in-person negotiations in mid-May, after which the negotiations were conducted via email exchanges and bilateral consultations. The co-penholders placed a revised version of the draft resolution under silence on 2 June, but the US broke silence on several aspects of the draft text. The co-penholders made further revisions to the text and put it under another silence procedure on 10 June, which it passed on the following day (11 June). The co-penholders then placed the draft text in blue and opened it for co-sponsorship by the wider UN membership ahead of the vote on 23 June.
The negotiations do not appear to have been particularly contentious, but several Council members, particularly the permanent members, raised some issues. As a result, it took nearly a month to secure the support of all Council members.
The draft text in blue condemns all attacks against UN peacekeepers and pays tribute to those who have sacrificed their lives in the line of duty. It also underscores that attacks against peacekeepers may constitute war crimes and stresses the need to ensure accountability as a means of deterring future attacks and enhancing the safety and security of peacekeepers. In this context, it calls on all relevant stakeholders to cooperate with the UN in this endeavour, and emphasises the responsibility of host states to take all necessary measures to investigate such crimes and prosecute the perpetrators, in line with national and international law as well as in accordance with the status of forces agreements (SOFA). It also encourages troop-and police-contributing countries affected by such crimes to deploy, on a voluntary basis and at the request of host states, trained personnel to support national investigative efforts.
An issue that emerged during the negotiations concerned the scope of investigations that peacekeeping missions can undertake. Under the current accountability framework—that is, the existing practices as set out in various resolutions and standard operating procedures being used by the UN Secretariat and field missions—the primary responsibility for investigations and prosecutions rests with the host state, while peacekeeping missions may provide assistance upon request. At the same time, the recent press statements issued by Security Council members in relation to the last three attacks on UNIFIL have requested the mission to conduct investigations into the incidents. The original draft text followed this approach by requesting the Secretary-General to ensure that relevant peacekeeping missions undertake prompt, impartial, and transparent investigations into such attacks. However, some members expressed concern that this could be seen as encroaching on host state sovereignty. Accordingly, the co-penholders proposed language which strikes a balance by requesting UN peace operations to “promptly establish clear factual records of the incidents” and make them available to support host state investigations.
Another sticking point during the negotiations apparently concerned a proposal to appoint a Special Envoy on Accountability for Crimes Against Peacekeepers, who would serve as a focal point for strengthening the Secretariat’s capacity in this area and enhancing coordination across the UN system on the prevention, investigation, and prosecution of crimes against peacekeepers. However, it appears that some permanent members were reluctant to support the creation of a new post, due to concerns about establishing a new structure and its budgetary implications. In an effort to reach a compromise, the co-penholders proposed an alternative arrangement whereby the Secretary-General would designate an existing senior focal point to address the concerns of those members instead of creating a new post, while preserving the objective of strengthening coordination and follow-up within the UN system. The compromise proposal appears to have been accepted and is therefore reflected in the draft text in blue.
It seems that another issue that arose during the negotiations concerned a proposed reporting requirement asking the Secretary-General to submit quarterly reports to the Security Council on the status of the investigation and prosecution of crimes against peacekeepers, including the work of the proposed Special Envoy. This proposal faced opposition from some Council members, apparently because of concerns about potential financial implications. Therefore, the co-penholders offered a compromise by instead proposing that the Secretary-General submits an annual report, which ultimately gained the support of those members. The draft text in blue requests the Secretary-General to submit the first report within 120 days of the resolution’s adoption. The report is expected to include a range of options for the Council’s consideration on ways and means of addressing crimes against peacekeepers and strengthening accountability for such acts.
______________________________________________________________
**Post-script: On 23 June, the Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 2823 which focuses on ensuring accountability for crimes against peacekeepers. The resolution, co-authored by Denmark and Pakistan, garnered the support of 153 co-sponsors from the wider UN membership.
