It is perhaps ironic and tragic when two bitter enemies find themselves aligned on the same side of a cause—one that reveals malicious and self-destructive tendencies. The recent developments in southern Lebanon involving Israel, Hezbollah, and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) serve as a stark example.

Over the past few years, the 10,000-strong UN peacekeeping force, stationed in the south since 1978, has come under intense political pressure from Israel and the United States. Its funding has been challenged, with accusations that UNIFIL is complicit with Hezbollah, allegedly allowing the group to use the UN’s presence as cover to arm itself and expand its vast network of tunnels and bunkers.

Conversely, Hezbollah openly denounces UNIFIL, branding it a spy network and a tool of Israel, whose sole purpose, they claim, is to monitor and report on Iranian-backed militias. As a result, mobs of Hezbollah supporters have assaulted UN patrols, going so far as to ambush and kill Irish peacekeeper Seán Rooney in December 2022. Most recently, a mob of villagers confronted Finnish peacekeepers.

These so-called village attacks on peacekeepers have noticeably intensified in recent months, coinciding with efforts by the Lebanese government, Israel, and the international community to enforce UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1701. This resolution calls for the complete disarmament of Hezbollah and its allied factions.

In reality, both Israel and Hezbollah are aggressively working to undermine UNIFIL’s mandate. Given the momentum of recent events, the dissolution of UNIFIL’s presence may not be difficult to achieve.

Israel has publicly advocated for defunding UNIFIL on multiple occasions, arguing that its operations provide Hezbollah and its surrounding communities with political and economic cover. Currently, UNIFIL’s budget is around $500 million, allocated partly to military operations and partly to socio-economic programs, such as healthcare and education, serving the southern Lebanese population—a majority of whom vocally support Hezbollah. Israel maintains that despite UNIFIL’s presence since 1978, Hezbollah has continued to operate freely, even building tunnels mere feet from UN observation posts.

The exit of UNIFIL would also have significant humanitarian consequences. Many communities in southern Lebanon, particularly among the Shiite population, have benefited from the UN’s medical and educational services. With their departure, residents would become even more reliant on Hezbollah’s social service networks—services that are both politicized and strategically designed to foster dependency. This outcome would be counterproductive to the broader goal of diminishing Hezbollah’s influence and achieving lasting disarmament.

Hezbollah, for its part, publicly antagonizes UNIFIL yet does not genuinely wish for their departure. The peacekeepers serve as human shields and a distraction from Hezbollah’s growing militarization—an issue that is not only of international concern but increasingly a domestic Lebanese one. In truth, peacekeepers should not be tasked with disarming a powerful militia responsible for provoking war and devastation in southern Lebanon. This responsibility lies squarely with the Lebanese state, which must exercise full sovereignty over its territory and borders.

The ongoing attacks on UNIFIL, carried out by supposedly outraged villagers, are exacerbated by the weak and symbolic condemnations issued by the Lebanese government. Despite official statements denouncing such violence, authorities have consistently failed to prevent their recurrence. UNIFIL peacekeepers are, in theory, under the protection of the Lebanese state and its armed forces. Therefore, any assault by so-called disgruntled villagers should be met with decisive accountability—a standard sorely lacking in Lebanon’s political leadership.

Looking ahead, if UNIFIL is to remain operational in Lebanon, it must do so under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which allows for immediate action without requiring consent or cooperation from the Lebanese state or its army.

Whatever the future holds for Lebanon, and the people of the south, the chaos surrounding these attacks cannot obscure the root issue—Hezbollah’s weapons, which represent a clear and immediate threat to Lebanon’s sovereignty and stability. UNIFIL has long functioned as training wheels on a child’s bicycle—supportive yet temporary. However, the time has come for Lebanon, now a sovereign adult, to assume full responsibility and move forward without external crutches.

The blue-helmeted peacekeepers can only be effective if the villagers come to understand who their true enemies are. Allowing Hezbollah—or any future militant entity—to manipulate and use them will only lead to further marginalization and make them dangerously expendable.