Recent incidents involving Indonesian UNIFIL troops in southern Lebanon have been causing some consternation, not least in Jakarta. However, these attacks do not provide sufficient reason for Indonesia to withdraw its troops from Lebanon. Instead, the confrontations that took place close to the border near Adchit al-Qusayr and Naqoura will require Indonesia to think differently about international peacekeeping, press its diplomats for a stronger mandate for UNIFIL, and conduct a careful risk assessment at national level to weigh the interests at stake against the risks to its soldiers’ safety. Indonesia, as the world’s second largest contributor to UN peacekeeping forces, will be challenged in each of these areas.

Soldiers of the Indonesian contingent patrolling with the UNIFIL force came under fire on Thursday from Israeli troops and militia between Lebanese and UNIFIL cordon points. One of the Indonesian troops was killed, and three others were wounded in the clash. This was the third serious incident involving the Indonesian contingent; two Indonesian soldiers were wounded at the UNIFIL barracks in Naqoura in mid February in an incident which the troops described as a serious breach of a supposed neutral cordon that the UNIFIL was supposed to monitor and control.

Indonesia on Friday condemned the killing of one of its soldiers in south Lebanon and demanded a proper investigation into the incident from the UN, as well as more cooperation from the UN top hierarchy. The country expressed sympathy for the soldier who was killed while fighting “to defend order and peace” in a foreign land, and showed anger and discontent that mechanisms to confront the “militias” were not adequate. Members of the Indonesian parliament took the government to task over the limitations of the UNIFIL in preventing or stopping incidents like the recent one. But for now, the Indonesian government seems unlikely to make any gestures which could be seen as withdrawing from the peacekeeping mission, consistent with the country’s image as a multinational peacekeeper.

Events involving Indonesian peacekeepers in Lebanon have underlined the failing mandate of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) in a region experiencing a sharp rise in tensions. The mandate of UNIFIL, originally established to monitor a ceasefire and the compliance of both Israeli and Hizbollah forces, has not kept pace with the deteriorating security situation in southern Lebanon. Reports of Indonesian troops being lured across the Lebanon-Israel border and subsequently captured by Hizbollah while on patrol near the village of Aita Al Sha’ab with Lebanese soldiers have sparked outrage in Indonesia. Scenes of Indonesian troops being abused by locals after their capture, and the eventual decision by the Indonesian government to withdraw its contingent from the mission, have reinforced a growing perception that Jakarta’s participation in the UN mission in Lebanon was a strategic blunder.

Indonesia’s participation in the UN mission in Lebanon was initially greeted with optimism. However, the events unfolding in Lebanon reflect a broader failing on the part of the UN in developing an appropriate mandate and rules of engagement for its peacekeepers in the worst of times. For countries such as Indonesia, with a proud record of participation in UN peacekeeping missions around the world, events in Lebanon demand a full and transparent inquiry into the circumstances that led to the capture of its troops and a thoughtful assessment of future participation in UN missions.

The country will face several challenges. Firstly, the country cannot help but feel worried about the deteriorating situation in the Lebanese security environment, which is expected to worsen with the unfolding of a harsh conflict. Other parties and countries, which are also directly involved in the regional conflict in Syria, Iran, Israel, and Hezbollah, are expected to pose threats to the Indonesian soldiers in UNIFIL, where they will be more often and intensively attacked than before. Secondly, the situation could increasingly evoke mounting pressure from the Indonesian public, who will demand that the country withdraw its troops from Lebanon once the number of victims rises. It will not be easy for the government to exercise its independent diplomacy, in demanding an expanded mandate for UNIFIL, for example, without annoying the major powers and the principal sponsors of the mission. And thirdly, the recurrence of attacks on UN peacekeepers tends to erode faith in the UN’s capacity to field a neutral observer mission and maintain peace and security in a very volatile environment.

However, there are also several workable solutions which can be undertaken by Indonesia to continue the country’s contributions to peacekeeping operations while minimising risks. First, Indonesia should continue to advocate firmly for enhanced force protection at the UN and with UNIFIL Command. This can be achieved through enhancing basic infrastructure such as barracks, re-planning of patrol routes and ambush procedures, improving early warning systems and enhancing engagement with local actors. Secondly, Indonesia and the UN Department of Peace Operations must make joint efforts to seek a mandate review to address the changing security landscape on the ground, which is a highly politically sensitive issue. However, this needs to be done to reassess and clarify roles and mandates and to allow greater flexibility. Thirdly, Indonesia needs to develop a comprehensive national risk-assessment framework to identify risks and challenges which Indonesia might face in contributing troops to United Nations peacekeeping operations. The assessment must take into account not only military aspects but also those of diplomacy and politics. This leverage should be used to build alliances with other contributing national militaries and MoDs and press them to raise the issues of safety and mandate with their own embassies and with the US military.

Two incidents have been reported recently where Indonesia has been attacked and its soldiers targeted while conducting a UNIFIL peacekeeping mission in South Lebanon. These are not isolated incidents, and in today’s conflict-prone world, they are inevitable challenges of modern-day peacekeeping. While these incidents may make uncomfortable reading, they should not be seen as a reason for Indonesia to withdraw from global peace operations. Rather, they highlight the need for Indonesia to revisit its approach to peacekeeping, adopting enhanced force protection measures for its troops, and increasing diplomatic involvement in the mandate-making process. There is also a need for a greater understanding of the complexities of the conflicts that Indonesia is involved in and the changing dynamics of the countries in which it deploys its military personnel. By recognising the sacrifices of these fallen soldiers, Indonesia can continue to demonstrate its adherence to its long-held commitment to supporting peace and security issues worldwide.

Simon Hutagalung is a retired Indonesian diplomat. His views are his own.

Mroue, B. (2025, September 3). Israel criticised for dropping grenades near UN peacekeepers in Lebanon. AP News

Antara News Agency. (2026, March 30). UN Chief condemns killing of Indonesian peacekeeper in Lebanon. Tempo.co

© Eurasia Review