Nobody wants this (but Israel): On security of Indian peacekeepers

India is in danger of getting the notorious distinction of having its own soldiers harmed by the arms and munitions it has supplied to Israel. Will the government of India do something about it before it is too late?

—

IN a significant escalation of conflict, Israel has attacked the United Nations (UN) peacekeepers stationed in Lebanon for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

So far, two Indonesian peacekeepers and two Sri Lankan peacekeepers have been injured in the attacks by Israel, and fifteen peacekeepers have suffered effects, including skin irritation and gastrointestinal reactions to the smoke generated after firing by Israel.

Members of the Indian army are also currently stationed there as peacekeepers and are thus under serious and immediate risk of being attacked by Israel. In a cruel twist of fate, the Indian ministry of defence, through Munitions Indian Limited— a public sector undertaking, has supplied weapons to Israel during the ongoing conflict in Gaza and West Asia.

This post discusses the attacks from the perspective of international law, highlighting India's contribution to the issue of attacks on UN peacekeepers.

Laying down the law

Way back in 1948, the United Nations General Assembly asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to give an advisory opinion on the question of reparation in respect of damage suffered by either itself or by its agents while performing their duties.

India was a one-year-old state at the time and still finding its feet in international law and diplomacy. It had just been a year since the Kashmir matter was taken to the UN, and just four months since the government of Hyderabad— which in its own words was "a State not a member of the United Nations"—had referred its dispute with India to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).

Also read: India arms exports: A protection of civilians lens is required

Still, India was one of the five States to submit their written statements to the court. However, it must be noted that peacekeepers are not considered 'agents' of the UN. As such, the question about reparation was not about the damage suffered by them.

India's contribution to UN peacekeeping efforts

Over the years, India has contributed to more than 70 peacekeeping field missions of various types. It has been the largest contributor of troops to these missions.

The number of members of Indian contingents who have lost their lives on these missions is 177, as per India's external affairs minister, Dr S. Jaishankar. The website of the Permanent Mission of India to the UN provides a list of 72 soldiers who have been awarded gallantry medals for their service while on these missions. This shows that India has been proactive in its role as far as the safety of the peacekeepers is concerned… till now.

Protecting the protectors

On July 26, 2022, two of India's troop members of the Border Security Force— head constables Shishupal Singh and Sanwala Ram Vishnoi— in the UN Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) were attacked and killed.

At that time, India was a non-permanent member of the UNSC and immediately called for a meeting of the UNSC. Subsequently, in a press statement, the UNSC said that "deliberate attacks targeting peacekeepers may constitute war crimes under international law".

A few months later, in December 2022, India assumed the presidency of the UNSC. During its presidency, India launched a 'Group of Friends' to promote accountability for crimes against peacekeepers, as part of its 'Protecting the Protectors' initiative.

This was done to implement the UNSC Resolution 2589 of 2021 which was also piloted by India. That resolution had called upon "member States hosting or having hosted UN peacekeeping operations, to take all appropriate measures, in accordance with their national law, and international law, as applicable, to bring to justice perpetrators of the killing of, and all acts of violence against UN personnel."

Also read: India's arms sales to Israel: Bad legally, worse ethically—Part

The Group of Friends initiative of India was joined by Bangladesh, Egypt, France, Morocco and Nepal as co-chairs. It has had two meetings so far, in 2023 and 2024, and currently has 40 member States.

At the 2024 meeting, India launched a database "designed to record crimes against peacekeepers and monitor progress in holding perpetrators accountable".

Protecting the perpetrators?

In the aftermath of Israel's attack on the UNIFIL, on October 13, 2024, 34 UNIFIL members issued a joint statement condemning the attack and asked that such attacks must be stopped immediately and investigated adequately.

India decided not to join in issuing the statement. However, once the statement was out, the official account of the Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations expressed its support for the statement almost as an afterthought.

Subsequently, it also attached its name to the statement. One wonders why the government did not join the statement from the beginning, especially since it had already released a statement on the attacks on October 11, 2024, where it had expressed concern "at the deteriorating security situation along the Blue Line" and had reiterated that the "inviolability of UN premises must be respected by all, and appropriate measures taken to ensure the safety of UN peacekeepers and the sanctity of their mandate".

Considering that only Israel had attacked the peacekeepers, it is curious that India decided not to name it, and instead ambiguously asked "all" to ensure the safety of peacekeepers.

Indian weaponry and the Israeli army

The Indian ministry of defence has been supplying weapons to Israel and providing private Indian companies with licences to supply weapons to Israel.

Recently, a petition was filed challenging this action of the government. It was argued by the petitioners that by supplying weapons to Israel, India might be aiding in the commission of international crimes.

Also read: 'Flag of freedom' should fly 'not only for ourselves': Gaza and India's constitutional responsibility

A Supreme Court Bench, headed by the Chief Justice of India, rejected the petition. As I have argued in an earlier post, the court failed to appreciate the international law arguments within the petition.

Now we have a situation where, potentially, the buyer of Indian weapons might end up attacking members of Indian peacekeeping forces themselves. It will indeed be a cruel irony.

I say 'potentially' because, in its media briefing on October 17, 2024 referring to Israel's attack of October 13, 2024, which caused skin irritation to 15 UN peacekeepers, the official spokesperson of the Indian ministry of external affairs said that "in that particular zone we did not have any of our Indian troops".

Considering Israel's aggression throughout this month, further attacks on the peacekeepers cannot be ruled out. One can only hope that the Indian government will take some action to protect its troops before it is too late.