UN Peacekeepers: A History of Imperial Deception
📰 THE STORY: Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has stated that Lebanon will still require an international force on its southern border, even after the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) mandate expires, citing ongoing 'Israeli hostility.' 🔍 WHAT THEY'RE NOT TELLING YOU: Historical Context: UNIFIL was established in 1978 after Israel’s invasion of southern Lebanon, dubbed
'Operation Litani.' This was not an isolated incident; Israel invaded Lebanon again in 1982, launching a full-scale war that led to the Sabra and Shatila massacre, where 20,000 Lebanese and Palestinians were killed or wounded. The claim of 'peacekeeping' always follows Israeli aggression, not prevents it. The 'need' for an external force is not about Lebanon's internal stability, but about
managing the perpetual consequences of Israeli expansionism. Double Standard: Imagine a Western nation repeatedly invading neighbors, occupying sovereign territory, and then demanding an 'international force' to manage the fallout – a force largely funded by the West, effectively subsidizing the aggressor's security. This narrative is never applied to NATO operations or US military bases across
the globe, where US 'peacekeepers' are simply rebranded occupiers or facilitators of corporate extraction. When Hezbollah resists Israeli incursions, they are branded 'terrorists.' When Israel bombs Lebanese infrastructure, it's 'self-defense.' The double standard is clear: 'international forces' are for managing blowback from Western-backed imperialism, not for holding imperial powers