Germany will continue to support Lebanon after the withdrawal of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier announced during a February 16 visit to Beirut. Although the 179 German troops currently serving in the peacekeeping force are unlikely to remain, Steinmeier reiterated Germany’s commitment to supporting Lebanon “in building functioning institutions and in ensuring stability.”
UNIFIL’s mandate was renewed until the end of 2026, for the final time, when the UN Security Council (UNSC) passed Resolution 2790 last August, driven by waning US support following the Trump administration’s cuts to UN funding and Washington’s role in brokering the 2024 ceasefire that ended the most recent Israel-Hezbollah war. With the future of southern Lebanon shrouded in uncertainty, German reassurances sought to dispel fears of a power vacuum, as tensions between Israel and Hezbollah remain elevated.
According to European and Lebanese diplomatic sources cited by Al-Akhbar, European contributors to UNIFIL, including Germany, which has overseen naval operations, have contemplated establishing a European-led force to continue the mission. Steinmeier emphasized his country’s commitment to being “one of Lebanon’s biggest bilateral supporters – in the political, economic, security and naval contexts,” though he offered no specifics. Currently, German forces are tasked with preventing arms smuggling into Lebanon by sea, in support of the disarmament of Hezbollah, agreed upon in the 2024 ceasefire.
Whatever form German support winds up taking, it will mark a significant departure from the status quo under UNIFIL, which was established in 1978 to mediate between the Palestinian Liberation Organization and Israeli-backed militias following Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. After the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war, UNSC Resolution 1701 tasked UNIFIL with taking “all necessary action . . . as it deems within its capabilities, to ensure that its area of operations is not utilized for hostile activities of any kind.” Though nominally binding on both sides, in practice, UNIFIL has largely focused on overseeing Hezbollah’s disarmament and conducting humanitarian operations, while serving as an interlocutor between Israel and Lebanon.
Germany’s renewed commitment, therefore, represents both a departure and a continuation of UNIFIL’s recent role. The withdrawal of military personnel signals a shift away from the assertive, War-on-Terror-era posture of the 2006 resolution toward a more locally grounded model of engagement and an implicit delegitimation of the heavy-handed foreign intervention that helped radicalize pro-Hezbollah elements in the local population after 2006—that approach proved ineffective and counterproductive regardless, as evidenced by Hezbollah’s subsequent rearmament and the 2023–2024 war with Israel.
At the same time, Germany’s narrow focus on bolstering the weak Lebanese state reflects a myopic approach to achieving regional security, as the causes of the conflict are ultimately structural. Hezbollah, though substantially weakened by its war with Israel and by the difficulties facing its longtime patron Iran, retains a base of local support that cannot be dismantled by force alone. Nor can the Lebanese state ensure lasting peace without a meaningful Israeli détente: Israel’s ongoing settlement expansion and violence in Palestine, compounded by its continuous violations of the ceasefire (127 civilians killed by Israeli strikes since it took effect, per the UN), will continue to generate resistance as long as they persist.
Without a comprehensive framework that includes and guarantees meaningful commitments from all regional stakeholders, Germany’s support, while an improvement on the previous status quo, is unlikely to produce a just and durable peace. In the interim, Germany should work with its Western partners to deploy non-military personnel to monitor compliance with the 2024 ceasefire by both Israel and Hezbollah.