Lebanon's security dilemma: navigating the divide between UN mandates and conflicting national approaches

Abstract

This article reflects on the challenges of United Nations (UN) state-building efforts in Lebanon, highlighting the disconnect between international security frameworks and Lebanon's geopolitical realities and security needs. The UN's approach, rooted in a state-centric model that prioritizes centralized authority and a monopoly on the use of force, struggles to address Lebanon's hybrid security governance, where groups like Hezbollah and the idea of resistance play a crucial role. By examining the implementation and follow-up process of the UN resolutions on Lebanon, particularly 1701 and 1559, this article seeks to reveal the material and ideational dilemmas between international and Lebanese approaches to state and security building. Using a qualitative methodology that combines critical discourse analysis, policy review, and interviews with Lebanese politicians, the study critiques the Western-centric paradigm of state-building, arguing that it overlooks local political realities and entrenched power dynamics. Instead, the article advocates for a more adaptive, context-driven approach that fosters national ownership of security reforms for long-term stability.