logo
UNIFIL condemns attack on patrol in southern Lebanon

UNIFIL condemns attack on patrol in southern Lebanon

Arab News16-05-2025

BEIRUT: Lebanese authorities on Friday were urged to ensure that UN peacekeepers could carry out their mandated tasks without threats or obstruction.
The UN Interim Force in Lebanon, or UNIFIL, 'reminds all actors to avoid actions putting UN peacekeepers in danger,' said its spokesperson Andrea Tenenti.
They must respect the inviolability of UN personnel and premises at all times, he stressed.
Tenenti said the routine UN peacekeeping patrol was 'pre-planned and coordinated with the Lebanese army.'
The UNIFIL statement came after its patrol was attacked on Friday in southern Lebanon by a large group of people wielding metal sticks and axes.
The attack took place in the villages of Jmayjmeh and Khirbet Silim.
The peacekeepers were confronted when the group attempted to block their movement using aggressive means, according to the UNIFIL statement.
A number of residents in Jmayjmeh in the Bint Jbeil district of southern Lebanon prevented the UNIFIL patrol on Friday from reaching a privately owned area in the town.
However, the incident escalated into gunfire and the use of smoke grenades.
The residents, most of whom are Hezbollah supporters, justified their actions by claiming that 'the patrol was not accompanied by the Lebanese army to complete its mission.'
According to journalists in the area and video footage captured by mobile phones, the confrontation escalated to the point where soldiers from the UNIFIL patrol — composed of French, Norwegian, Finnish, and Scottish battalions — fired shots into the air and used tear gas to disperse the crowd, until a Lebanese army patrol arrived and escorted the UNIFIL unit out of the area.
According to the National News Agency, the incident resulted in injuries among both UNIFIL personnel and civilians.
UNIFIL spokesperson Tenenti, in an official statement issued by the UNIFIL command, described the incident from the perspective of the international forces.
He said: 'This morning, a UNIFIL patrol conducting a routine operational activity between the villages of Jmayjmeh and Khirbat Silim was confronted by a large group of individuals in civilian clothing.
'The individuals attempted to stop the patrol using aggressive means, wielding metal sticks and axes, resulting in damage to the vehicles. Fortunately, no injuries were reported.
'In response, UNIFIL peacekeepers used non-lethal force to ensure the safety of both the peacekeepers and those present.
'The Lebanese Armed Forces were informed and promptly arrived at the scene, subsequently escorting the patrol back to base.'
He stressed: 'UNIFIL reminds all actors that its mandate provides freedom of movement within its area of operations in south Lebanon, and any restriction on this violates UN resolution 1701, which authorizes the UNIFIL to operate independently — with or without the Lebanese Armed Forces.
'While we always coordinate our operational activities with the Lebanese forces, our ability to conduct these activities independently does not depend on their presence.'
He added: 'It is unacceptable that UNIFIL peacekeepers conducting Security Council-mandated tasks are routinely targeted.'
UNIFIL reiterated that 'the freedom of movement of its peacekeepers is essential to accomplishing our mandate, which requires us to be able to act independently and impartially.'
Since the ceasefire agreement took effect in November 2024, attacks on UNIFIL by Hezbollah supporters have continued and escalated, particularly in recent weeks, under the pretext of preventing the UN force from entering private property.
Friday's attacks coincide with the request made by the Lebanese Cabinet last Wednesday to extend UNIFIL's mandate for one year.
As usual, the Security Council reviews the request and subsequently renews the mandate of UNIFIL each August.
UNIFIL has maintained a presence south of the Litani River since 1978, deploying around 10,000 troops.
In August 2022, most of the members of the UN Security Council approved the extension of UNIFIL's mandate after an amendment to the freedom of movement of international peacekeepers.
The amendment stated: 'UNIFIL does not require prior authorization or permission to carry out its mandated tasks and is allowed to conduct its operations independently. It emphasized, however, 'coordination with the Lebanese government.'
Hezbollah and the Lebanese government, influenced by Hezbollah, had protested against the amendment.
Hezbollah's then Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah warned against adopting the amendment.
He said: 'If they (UNIFIL) intend to act independently of the state and the Lebanese army, which is responsible for movement south of Litani, then they are pushing matters in a direction that is not in their interest.'
Less than four months after the amendment of UNIFIL's duties, a violent incident — considered the most serious against the peacekeepers — took place in December 2022.
An Irish soldier was killed and three others were injured when their armored vehicle was shot at in the Aaqbiyeh area, north of the Litani River, after they lost their way.
The investigation into the incident in 2023 led to the issuance of an indictment by the military judiciary, accusing five Hezbollah members of premeditated murder.
One of them, Mohammed Ayyad, was arrested, but later that same year, he was released because he was said to be suffering from a terminal illness and did not appear before the judiciary thereafter.
Despite Lebanese objections, UNIFIL's mandate was renewed in 2023, without altering the amendment.
Hezbollah supporters continued to assault UNIFIL, and incidents have escalated since the ceasefire took effect in November 2024, especially in recent weeks.
Lebanon has, however, pledged to increase the army's presence along the southern border and has already expanded its deployment.
According to President Joseph Aoun, the Lebanese army 'carried out its duties in full south of the Litani River and continues to confiscate weapons and ammunition and to dismantle armed groups.'
A government source speaking to Arab News on condition of anonymity said on Friday that 'the new request submitted by the Nawaf Salam government was not accompanied by a request to cancel the amendment rejected by Hezbollah. Instead, it accepted the amendment as it stands.
'Lebanon fears that the US and Israel may seek to add new privileges to UNIFIL in the next mandate extension.
"Meanwhile, the French side, as promised, is working to help Lebanon maintain the extension without any additional amendments.
'In the aftermath of war, Israel has been free to carry out attacks on Lebanon with Washington's approval. It has repeatedly expressed its dissatisfaction with UNIFIL's role, which it considers insufficient.'
Also on Friday, a statement signed by the 'residents of Jmayjmeh' accused UNIFIL of 'overstepping by entering the vicinity of the town's hills for the second time without being accompanied by the Lebanese army and trespassing onto private property.'
According to the statement, the residents 'rushed to inspect the property and asked UNIFIL peacekeepers to retreat and not to go further into the premises.
'However, UNIFIL started quarreling with the residents, throwing tear gas canisters at their eyes and firing bullets, resulting in several injuries.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Man United captain Bruno Fernandes rejects $135m Al-Hilal transfer deal, UK media reports
Man United captain Bruno Fernandes rejects $135m Al-Hilal transfer deal, UK media reports

Arab News

time5 hours ago

  • Arab News

Man United captain Bruno Fernandes rejects $135m Al-Hilal transfer deal, UK media reports

BEIRUT: Manchester United captain Bruno Fernandes reportedly turned down a lucrative offer to sign for Saudi Pro League powerhouses Al-Hilal, for 'family and personal' reasons. Though there had been no official word from Al-Hilal about any approach to the player, several British media outlets reported on Tuesday that the 30-year-old rejected a massive deal said to be worth £80 million-£100 million ($108 million-$135 million). BBC Sport said the Portuguese midfielder spent the past few days 'seriously' considering an offer that would have more than doubled what he earns at Old Trafford, where he is already one of the top earners. Having discussed the deal with his family, however, Fernandes told the Saudi club he would not be joining them. Portugal were preparing on Tuesday for their Nation League semifinal against Germany on Wednesday, and with Fernandes expected to participate in the prematch press conference in Munich, it was thought the question of Al-Hilal's interest in him might be raised. Man United were said to be thrilled and relieved by his decision to stay with the club. Head coach Ruben Amorim had said last week that he believed his captain would remain at Old Trafford for the forseeable future. According to the British media reports, there was no direct communication between the two clubs, so United were never presented with any official offer from Al-Hilal that they could turn down. However, the stories suggested the Saudi side were willing to offer Fernandes up to £100 million to sign in time for the FIFA Club World Cup, while will take place in the US between June 14 and July 13. The Mirror newspaper quoted former United star Rio Ferdinand as saying he was delighted that Fernandes decided to remain in England. 'I've got to be honest (it's) the biggest news for me today,' Ferdinand reportedly said on his podcast. Sky Sports said that Al-Hilal offered Fernandes £100 million to join and were willing to almost treble his £250,000-a-week wages, and his decision to turn them down was thought to be both a football and personal one. It was also reported that the player's agent, Miguel Pinho, had visited Riyadh for talks with senior Al-Hilal executives but this could not be independently confirmed. said Fernandes rejected an 'eye-watering' £700,000-a-week move after discussing it with his family and coach. Former United right-back Gary Neville told Sky Sports the transfer would not have been a bad deal, financially, for the Old Trafford club but added: 'He's so important. The fact that he wants to stay, the fact that he wants to go through this and come out the other side — because it would have been easy for him at the end of this season to say, 'Look, I'm done here' — will endear him towards Manchester United fans even more.' Al-Hilal often shares important news through the club's account on social media platform X but there had been no mention of any potential offer to Fernandes.

Hezbollah: The Causes and Functions of Delirium
Hezbollah: The Causes and Functions of Delirium

Asharq Al-Awsat

time9 hours ago

  • Asharq Al-Awsat

Hezbollah: The Causes and Functions of Delirium

Doctors and analysts agree that delirium is a sudden change in the brain function that leads to disturbance and mental confusion. It often results from a transformation the body is subjected to; it could be surgery or withdrawal that follows long-term alcohol abuse. One of the more acute symptoms of delirium is inattention and reduced awareness of one's surroundings; the delirious can sometimes forget who he is, where he is, and what he is doing there. This can result in physiological disorientation, manifesting as either near-paralytic lethargy or an erratic. The statements coming from Hezbollah since the seismic change resulting from the 'support war' and its ramifications are strikingly delirious. One could probably say, albeit with some creative license, that an analogy could be drawn with both surgery and recovery from addiction. Indeed, one would think that the war, the operation, has reduced Hezbollah's triumphalist intoxication and its domineering behavior, challenging the party to adapt to this new reality. Yet, listening to Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem (and some of the party's officials and spokesmen) set deadlines, speak of giving diplomacy and the government a chance, threaten to not extend these deadlines if they are not met, double down on the principle of 'the army, the people and the resistance,' deny defeat, and adamantly refuse to relinquish their weapons, one unequivocally concludes that its utter failure to adapt has reinforced its delirium. However, accuracy demands recognizing that this outcome is not without justification. Adaptation becomes exceedingly difficult when there has been something of a consensus, for over four decades, on idealizing the addiction. The binge that began in the early 1980s and ended only a few months ago had been presented as the epitome of sobriety, while those who refused to endorse this view were called on to treat their sick and scheming souls. The long-standing duality of arms, which allowed an illegitimate actor to make decisions of war and peace, was framed as the ultimate embodiment of prudence and the essence of truth. This extreme distortion had the upper hand in appointing presidents and ministers and shaping national policy and planning. As for the fact the party, without an official mandate, had constituted a parallel society that had been above and outside the state, and had branded others traitors at a whim, this had also seemed like its indisputable right. For years, Hezbollah was allowed to inform us that we were under threat as our senses and lived experiences were telling us the opposite, and it was allowed to warn us that we must resist, regardless of our desires, thoughts, or capabilities. Meanwhile, its subordinates were tasked with deciding which films must not be watched, and which books should not be translated or read, on our behalf. This makes the transition difficult. From a phase in which addiction ruled and delirium was indulged, forcing others to adapt to it, we are now entering a phase in which delirium is constrained and called by its real and dangerous names, while its authors are the ones expected to adapt. In other words, we are transitioning from an era in which reality had been made to accommodate addiction, to one in which the addict is now called upon to accommodate reality. And, without a doubt, that is extremely difficult. This delirium nonetheless remains functional. Iran will continue to find use for it so long as it is negotiating with Washington. Hezbollah's weapons are to remain in its hands and not handed over to the state; just as the Houthis' fireworks in Yemen, this bargaining chip must be maintained. Yet, everything seems smaller than it had once been: this applies just as much to the causes that are promoted as it does to material capacities and tools. The trajectory they have been on suggests that the war has led to decline and contraction, in parallel with Iran's own transformation from a frightening force with serious leverage to a fearful one desperately hanging on to its damaged cards. The contrast between the two phases could be summed up as follows: in the previous phase, a prime minister who went against the party and its patrons' wishes would be assassinated in a grand theatrical attack, and the ensuing investigation would be obstructed. In the current phase, the prime minister is spitefully and obscenely slandered a 'Zionist' for going against these wishes. This is not to downplay the gravity of what is happening today, especially in light of the recent municipal election results that showed this delirious consciousness can, even in defeat, obtain (for reasons too complex to unpack here) another mass pledge of allegiance. This is the case despite the immense costs of maintaining the allegiance - for the security of the Lebanese people, for their economy, for the country's reconstruction, and for the effort to ensure a national recovery. Those continuing to pledge allegiance may well ultimately end up hurting the most. This state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue, and it must not be tolerated. If all Lebanese are called upon to make great efforts, coupled with a reduction of provocations, to integrate a third of the population into a unified national project, then those directly concerned are the first to be called on to break away from a delusional and defeated project that cannot lead anywhere safe.

Iran Says Continuing Uranium Enrichment on Its Soil 'Red Line'
Iran Says Continuing Uranium Enrichment on Its Soil 'Red Line'

Asharq Al-Awsat

time9 hours ago

  • Asharq Al-Awsat

Iran Says Continuing Uranium Enrichment on Its Soil 'Red Line'

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tuesday that Iran's right to enrich uranium on its soil was a "red line" after the United States submitted its proposal for a new nuclear deal. "Continuing enrichment on Iranian soil is our red line," Araghchi said while on a visit to Lebanon, adding that his country will respond to the proposal in the coming days based on Iran's "principled positions and the interests of the Iranian people". US President Donald Trump on Monday reiterated that Iran will not be allowed any enrichment of uranium under a potential deal with Washington. Araghchi said the US proposal, submitted through mediator Oman, has "many ambiguities and questions". On Saturday, Iran said it received "elements" of a US proposal for a nuclear deal following five rounds of talks that started in April and were mediated by Oman. Uranium enrichment has remained a key point of contention between Washington and Tehran in the talks to seal a nuclear deal, with Iran defending what it says is its right to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy program and the US calling it a "red line". "We will not ask anyone for permission to continue enriching uranium in Iran. However, we are ready to take steps... to ensure that this enrichment will not lead to the production of nuclear weapons," Araghchi said. Araghchi was visiting Beirut following a stop in Cairo on Monday, where he met with Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Grossi on Monday called for more transparency from Iran following a leaked report that showed Tehran had increased production of highly enriched uranium. The IAEA report showed that Iran has ramped up production of uranium enriched up to 60 percent purity -- close to the roughly 90 percent level needed for atomic weapons. Western countries, including the United States, have long accused Iran of seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, while Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store