THE DEATH OF TNI SOLDIERS DURING A UNIFIL MISSION (International Law and Political Analysis)

By: AM Hendropriyono*

Introduction

Three of the best soldiers of the Indonesian National Army (TNI) died on March 29 and 30, 2026, in South Lebanon during a UNIFIL mission, as a result of an attack during the escalating conflict.

They were Captain (Inf) Zulmi Aditya Iskandar, First Sergeant Muhammad Nur Ichwan, who was on a logistics convoy that was attacked in Bani Hayyan, and Private  Fahrizal Rhomadhon at the UNIFIL post in Adchit Al-Qusayr, during a UN (United Nations) peacekeeping mission. This incident has strategic significance, as TNI casualties are rare in UNIFIL, a location that previously had a reputation for relative safety. This indicates a change in the situation, indicating that the area is now considered an active conflict zone (a grey zone, perhaps even a hot zone). The implication is that the security of UN troops is now in question, the risk of escalation between Israel and Lebanon is increasing, and the UN's position is being tested, particularly within the framework of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). Such incidents constitute a humanitarian tragedy, as well as an international law and political issue. Peacekeepers are supposed to be deployed as neutral actors to maintain stability in conflicts, but in practice, this neutrality is not always respected by the conflicting parties.

International Law Framework

The law basis for peacekeeping includes the United Nations Charter, the UN Security Council Mandate, and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). Peacekeepers are categorized as international personnel who must be protected, so attacks against them can be classified as violations of international humanitarian law, and under certain circumstances, even be charged as war crimes. Furthermore, the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their 1977 Additional Protocols affirm the protection of non-combatant personnel.

Who is to Blame?

1. The armed groups, the direct perpetrator, if the attack was carried out intentionally. The perpetrator can be considered a violation of international humanitarian law and can be held liable for international criminal liability. Attacks on peacekeepers fall within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
2. States parties to a conflict have an obligation to respect the UN mandate and should ensure the safety of international personnel. Negligence or aggressive actions can give rise to state responsibility.
3. The United Nations, as an international organization, has an obligation to ensure a clear mandate, provide adequate Rules of Engagement (ROE), and ensure the safety of troops. Under modern international law doctrine, international organizations can be held accountable for operational negligence. Unlike past instances in our world, including the formation of the Federation of Malaysia (1963) and the referendum in East Timor (1999), no one can form a critical perception of the UN.
4. The sending country, in this case Indonesia, is only responsible for the readiness of personnel, training, and equipment. The deaths of the Indonesian UNIFIL soldiers at the end of March 2026 were not related to their lack of readiness, training, or equipment.
5. The party causing the death of the TNI soldier remains fully responsible, both directly and through actions accountable under international law.

International Political Dimension

1. The Erosion of Peacekeeping Neutrality in modern conflicts, where peacekeepers are no longer viewed as neutral and are often considered part of foreign powers.
2. In Asymmetric Conflicts, non-state groups are not fully subject to international law and are difficult to hold formally accountable.

Proxy Conflict