UN Resolution 1701 is central to the Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire. But what exactly does it entail?

 BEIRUT  — In 2006, following a monthlong war between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah militant group, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution aimed at ending the conflict and establishing lasting security along the border.

Although a period of relative calm lasted nearly two decades, the terms of Resolution 1701 were never fully implemented.

Now, determining how to enforce it is crucial for a U.S.-brokered deal that resulted in a ceasefire on Wednesday.

After nearly a year of low-level clashes, the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah escalated into all-out war in late September, leading to an Israeli ground invasion. As Israeli jets carried out extensive bombings across Lebanon and Hezbollah launched rockets deeper into northern Israel, U.N. and diplomatic officials revisited the 2006 resolution in an effort to resolve the conflict.

Years of intense political division and regional geopolitical tensions have stalled significant progress on implementing Resolution 1701. Nevertheless, the international community still views it as the best hope for long-term stability between Israel and Lebanon.

Nearly two decades after the last war between Israel and Hezbollah, the United States has spearheaded shuttle diplomacy efforts to facilitate a ceasefire proposal between Lebanon and Israel. This new initiative reaffirms commitment to the resolution, accompanied by an implementation plan aimed at revitalizing its provisions.

 Peacekeepers representing 41 different national contingents that make up the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), prepare to raise flags during a ceremony to mark the 40th anniversary of its peacekeeping presence in southern Lebanon, at the mission headquarters in the coastal town of Naqoura, Lebanon, Monday, March 19, 2018. (AP Photo)

What is UNSC Resolution 1701?

In 2000, Israel withdrew its forces from most of southern Lebanon, following a U.N.-demarcated “Blue Line” that separates the two countries and the Israeli-annexed Golan Heights, which most of the international community recognizes as occupied Syrian territory. The U.N. peacekeeping forces in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL, expanded their presence along this line of withdrawal.

Resolution 1701 aimed to finalize Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon and ensure that Hezbollah moved north of the Litani River, leaving the area under the control of the Lebanese military and U.N. peacekeepers.

As part of this effort, up to 15,000 U.N. peacekeepers would be deployed to help maintain peace, facilitate the return of displaced Lebanese citizens, and secure the region alongside the Lebanese military.

The objective was to achieve long-term security, with land borders eventually defined to address territorial disputes.

The resolution also reinforced earlier ones calling for the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, including Hezbollah.

“It was created for a specific situation and context,” said Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese army general, in an interview with The Associated Press. “However, as time passes, the core of the resolution starts to lose its significance.”

Has Resolution 1701 been implemented?

For years, Lebanon and Israel have blamed each other for numerous violations along their tense border. Israel has pointed to the continued presence of Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force and its expanding arsenal, alleging that the group uses a local environmental organization to gather intelligence on Israeli troops. Meanwhile, Lebanon has raised concerns about Israeli military jets and naval vessels entering its territory even during periods of calm.

“The role of UNIFIL has gradually diminished, like that of any peacekeeping force lacking a clear mandate,” said Joseph Bahout, director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy at the American University of Beirut. “They do not have the authority to inspect the area without coordinating with the Lebanese army.”

For years, UNIFIL has urged Israel to withdraw from certain territories north of the frontier, but these efforts have not yielded results. In the current conflict, the peacekeeping mission has accused both Israel and Hezbollah of obstructing and endangering its forces and operations.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah’s power has increased, both in terms of its military capabilities and its political influence within Lebanon.

The Iran-backed group played a crucial role in helping Syrian President Bashar Assad maintain power amidst efforts by armed opposition groups to overthrow him and supports Iranian-backed factions in Iraq and Yemen. Hezbollah is believed to possess around 150,000 rockets and missiles, including precision-guided munitions aimed at Israel, and has also incorporated drones into its arsenal.

Hanna notes that Hezbollah represents an unprecedented force as a non-state actor, wielding significant political and military influence.

How do mediators plan to implement Resolution 1701 nearly two decades later?

Israel’s security cabinet approved the ceasefire agreement late Tuesday, as confirmed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office. The ceasefire took effect at 4 a.m. local time on Wednesday.

U.S. and French efforts to broker the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah highlight their belief that the resolution remains crucial. For almost a year, Washington has been advocating various versions of a deal aimed at gradually achieving full implementation of the resolution.

International mediators hope that by increasing financial support for the Lebanese army— which was not involved in the Israel-Hezbollah conflict—Lebanon can deploy an additional 6,000 troops south of the Litani River to help enforce the resolution. As part of the agreement, an international monitoring committee led by the United States would oversee the implementation process to ensure that both Hezbollah and Israel carry out their withdrawals.

The specifics of how the committee would operate and how potential violations would be reported and addressed remain unclear. 

The current situation is significantly more complex than it was in 2006. Many remain skeptical about the resolution’s viability, as the political landscape and balance of power—both regionally and within Lebanon—have shifted dramatically since then.

“You’re linking Resolution 1701 to a multitude of factors,” Bahout noted. “A resolution reflects the balance of power and the political context at the time.”

With the ceasefire now in effect, there is hope that Israel and Lebanon can start negotiations to demarcate their land border and resolve disputes at various points along the Blue Line, paving the way for long-term security after decades of conflict and tension.