Sun Aug 17 06:35:13 UTC 2025: Okay, here’s a summary of the text and a rewritten news article from *The Hindu*, tailored for an Indian audience:

**Summary:**

The future of the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission in Lebanon is uncertain due to a rift between the U.S. and its European allies. The U.S., under the Trump administration, initially sought to end the mission, deeming it ineffective in curbing Hezbollah’s influence. European nations, along with Israel, opposed this, arguing it could create a security vacuum. A compromise was reached for a one-year extension followed by a wind-down period, but disagreements remain about setting a firm end date. Lebanon supports UNIFIL’s presence, citing the army’s limited capacity to fully secure the border region. The mission’s potential reduction or termination raises concerns about regional stability and the potential for increased Hezbollah activity.

**News Article:**

**The Hindu**

**U.S., European Allies Clash Over Future of UN Peacekeepers in Lebanon; Implications for Middle East Security**

**Washington, August 17, 2025, 12:18 pm IST:** A transatlantic divide is threatening the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), with the United States and its European partners at odds over the mission’s future. The dispute carries significant implications for the already fragile security landscape of the Middle East, particularly in light of last year’s conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.

The mandate for UNIFIL, established in 1978 and strengthened after the 2006 war, is set to expire at the end of August. While the force has been instrumental in monitoring security along the Lebanese-Israeli border, it has faced criticism from both sides. The U.S. administration, led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, initially pushed to terminate UNIFIL, viewing it as a costly and ineffective endeavor that fails to adequately address the threat posed by Hezbollah. This aligns with the Trump administration’s broader skepticism towards international alliances and budget cuts to UN agencies.

However, European nations, notably France and Italy, have strongly resisted ending the mission, arguing that a premature withdrawal could create a vacuum that Hezbollah could exploit. With support from U.S. ambassador to Turkiye, Tom Barrack, they lobbied for a one-year extension of UNIFIL’s mandate followed by a phased wind-down. Israel reluctantly agreed to an extension.

Lebanon’s government has also voiced its support for UNIFIL’s continued presence, citing the limitations of its own armed forces to fully patrol the border region, particularly given the ongoing challenges of smuggling across the border with Syria. “UNIFIL is maybe not fulfilling 100% what the Western powers or Israel desire. But for Lebanon, their presence is important,” said Retired Lebanese Army Gen. Khalil Helou.

The debate now centers on whether to set a firm deadline for UNIFIL’s withdrawal after the one-year extension. While the U.S. insists on a defined end date, France is pushing for a resolution that only indicates the Security Council’s “intention to work on a withdrawal.” A French draft resolution does not include a date for UNIFIL’s withdrawal, which U.S. officials say is required for their support.

Even if the mandate is renewed, financial constraints could lead to a scaling down of the mission. Discussions are underway to potentially reduce the number of peacekeepers while enhancing technological monitoring capabilities. The U.N. currently has roughly 10,000 peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, alongside approximately 6,000 Lebanese soldiers.

The outcome of the Security Council vote on UNIFIL’s mandate will have significant repercussions for regional stability, particularly given the ongoing tensions between Israel and Hezbollah, and the challenges faced by the Lebanese government in asserting full control over its territory. The situation will be closely watched in New Delhi, given India’s historical commitment to UN peacekeeping operations and its strategic interests in the Middle East.

Read More