Amidst Lebanon’s call for a peaceful solution to the problem between Russia and Ukraine, the international tone is gradually rising towards the necessity of implementing international resolutions, holding elections on time and carrying out actual reforms.

Starting from the Kuwaiti initiative, to the Security Council’ statement, to the European-Gulf joint statement, the question remains: Will the failure to complete the implementation of the resolutions and Lebanon’s continued reluctance to start real reform, again be a task for the UN Security Council to handle?

Prominent diplomatic sources say, basically, there are several tracks in the Security Council, which are as follows:

First, there is the press release, which carries holds general moral stance, but it is issued without the objection of any of the fifteen member states of the Security Council.

And there is the statement issued by the President of the Security Council, which is inspired by international resolutions, because it considers that the situation requires such a statement
Then there is the statement issued by the Security Council itself after its meeting in an informal consultation session, where it cannot issue a decision.

Then there is the official session of the Security Council, where it can issue one of two decisions: the first, under Chapter 6, that is, in the context of maintaining peace, and diplomatic and commendable endeavors in order to reach this peace. The second is a decision under Chapter 7, that is, the use of force to impose peace.

Currently, the presence of the international force operating in the south, is within the framework of Resolution 1701, for peacekeeping and not imposing it by force. Chapter 7 can only be used in the case of great international pressures. The press release can also set the stage for a decision under Chapter 6.

Sources say that there are comprehensive and complete decisions about Lebanon, why the search for new decisions. Decisions are already issued, but they must be implemented. Now the international pressure aims at reminding of the resolutions and the importance of working to implement them, because this is in Lebanon’s interest, and it does not aim so far to work for a new Security Council resolution. Any new and only if the international community deems it necessary to do, is to resort to Chapter 7, if the Lebanese officials continue in their failure to do something concrete and actual to extricate it from its crisis.

The sources indicate that neither Russia nor China will facilitate any Western tendency to resort to the Security Council regarding the Lebanese file, and in turn, the two countries will resort to using the veto, because they avoid Chapter 7, as it will have a big cost regarding the armies under the United Nations to do the job. In addition, the escalation in Western-Russian relations over the Ukrainian file during this stage will negatively affect any possible cooperation between the two parties on various issues.

The sources mention that when the international resolutions on Lebanon were issued, and on the Special Tribunal for Lebanon to try the criminals in the assassination of Martyr Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and his companions and other officials, Russia played a mitigating role in the tone of the resolutions or the extent to which it could reach.

All international resolutions on Lebanon require, in addition to the national will that all Lebanese parties must have, an international-regional consensus for their implementation. And any other internal or external means that leads to a war will not be chosen by anyone.