With the mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) set to expire at the end of August 2025, Lebanese, U.S. and French diplomats are intensifying efforts to determine the peacekeeping mission’s future amid sharp differences between Washington and its European allies.

The coming weeks mark a critical juncture in security negotiations that cover Hezbollah’s disarmament and the implementation of the ceasefire agreement signed between Israel and Lebanon in November 2024. Recent political, military and diplomatic talks have placed UNIFIL at the heart of these efforts, with the focus squarely on securing an extension of the mission.

According to Nidaa Al-Watan newspaper, France has drafted a proposal aimed at ensuring UNIFIL’s continuity by preserving its budget and troop levels while expanding the scope of its operations. The text underscores the Lebanese government as the sole guarantor of security in the south and insists Beirut must extend its control over all its territory.

While UNIFIL has supported the Lebanese Army in some disarmament efforts south of the Litani River, military experts in Washington argue the mission is ineffective without fundamental changes, such as authority for independent patrols and inspections.

A source close to the U.S. State Department said Washington’s objective was to empower the Lebanese government. But officials believe UNIFIL has failed to meaningfully restrict Hezbollah’s military footprint. The prevailing view in Washington, the source added, is that the mission should be phased out and the Lebanese Army given full responsibility for security sooner rather than later. The debate highlights widening rifts between the U.S. and European capitals, particularly Paris.

The United States and Israel are pressing for UNIFIL to be withdrawn within a year. But European governments and Lebanon itself strongly oppose the move, arguing the mission remains vital for regional stability. Beirut is lobbying for the mandate to remain unchanged.

The French draft also calls on Israel to withdraw from its remaining positions in Lebanon, hoping that transferring security responsibilities fully to the Lebanese Army and UNIFIL will reduce direct clashes with Hezbollah. Critics counter that the plan does not impose restrictions on the group. Analysts note that “the absence of strict monitoring gives Hezbollah a green light to continue expanding its military infrastructure, leaving the region exposed to future conflicts.”

The draft resolution’s stated goal is to rally international support for the Lebanese Army as a credible force capable of enforcing arms control against Hezbollah. But diplomats say success hinges on meaningful reforms within the army and genuine political will from Beirut.

“The French draft reflects growing divisions among major powers over how best to manage peacekeeping goals,” one Western diplomat said.

Diplomats familiar with the proposal say it is designed to reinforce Lebanon’s sovereignty and stability, but risks emboldening Hezbollah unless paired with strict enforcement and oversight. The text preserves temporary stability, they warn, but could entrench deeper security challenges unless UNIFIL’s rules of engagement are revised and Lebanon clamps down on uncontrolled weapons.

While the draft emphasizes Israeli withdrawal and condemns Israeli airstrikes, it includes no concrete mechanisms to dismantle Hezbollah’s military presence. “The language gives Hezbollah breathing space and relieves it of enforcement pressure,” one analyst noted.

Critics also argue UNIFIL has been largely ineffective since its deployment in 1978. Despite a $500 million annual budget and expanded troop levels after the 2006 war, the force has avoided direct confrontation with Hezbollah and often backed down, even though its mandate explicitly calls for restricting armed non-state groups. American observers say UNIFIL “passively watched Hezbollah become one of the world’s most heavily armed non-state actors, building tunnels and stockpiling rockets under its nose.”

They argue that while the resolution’s stated aim is full Lebanese government control in the south, the reality remains starkly different: Hezbollah still holds vast military and political power with little effective oversight.