Lebanon has told the UN Security Council that closing the UNIFIL peacekeeping mission in the south on 31 December would come too early, and asked for the present arrangement to run on for a limited period. France and most other members of the Council stand behind that request. Israel objects, telling a closed session that the decision is already settled, and the United States, which wants the mission wound up, has not said whether it would veto.
Beirut has put its position on paper. In a letter that has reached the members of the UN Security Council, the Lebanese government argues that closing the mandate of UNIFIL — the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, the peacekeeping mission deployed in the country's south — on 31 December comes too early, and asks that today's arrangement be allowed to run for a further bounded stretch. The Financial Times saw the letter and reported what it holds.[1]
Support for that request is already wide. Three people close to the talks describe France and most of the Council's other members as standing with Lebanon over Israeli objections. The push to prolong the mandate is being carried by Paris alongside Beirut.[1]
Israel made its case behind closed doors. Its ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, used a closed session to argue that the peacekeepers had not halted the growth of Hezbollah, the Lebanese armed movement, in southern Lebanon. Danon also said the decision to close the mission was settled. The United States argues for winding the mission up and has given no sign of whether it would veto an extension.[1]
