In Afghanistan, and elsewhere, there are thousands of armed people outside organised armed groups
Credit: IRIN |
Though International Humanitarian Law (IHL) lays down the minimum protection and standards applicable to situations where people are most vulnerable in armed conflict, the gaps between protection in principle and reality are wide, and keenly felt by civilians in conflict situations around the world.
Addressing the UN Security Council in November 2002, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan spoke of the need for actions required for the protection of civilians in three key areas: - Secure humanitarian access
- The clear separation of civilians and combatants
- Swift re-establishment of the rule of law, justice and reconciliation during post-conflict transitions
In addition, he highlighted three new challenges emerging for the protection of civilians in conflict: sexual exploitation and gender-based exploitation in situations of war, commercial exploitation and the escalating threat posed by global terrorism.
That said, the importance of other issues has not receded and includes, especially: the growing phenomenon of non-state armed groups; and the need to vigorously promote respect for the law in war situations.
Much of this agenda for the protection of civilians falls within the remit of IHL, though some aspects of reconciliation are beyond the purely humanitarian sphere - moving into the sphere of state politics - and will not be considered in detail here.
Humanitarian access
Carefully negotiated humanitarian access does much to improve the protection of civilians in the short term and to improve prospects for a transition to reconciliation in the longer term, according to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has a specific mandate under the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war to protect and assist victims of armed conflict and internal violence.
This humanitarian imperative to assist the victims of war has, over time, come to include other humanitarian agencies assuming the right to have safe and unimpeded access under the Geneva Conventions when they offer their assistance as "independent and impartial" actors on behalf of civilians and other vulnerable people.
Unimpeded access to all populations in need (on the basis of impartiality) can remove a basis for grievance, de-escalate a conflict, lower its intensity, give an indication of the benefits of peace, and set the stage for an effective transition to peace. Yet, in most cases, access continues to be a challenge.
In many conflicts, protection and assistance for civilians are manipulated, delayed or denied, and has obstacles put before it, including the insecurity of aid workers.
The results of limitations or denials of access have been very evident in the DRC, where war is estimated to have caused over two million "excess deaths" (over and above natural wastage) in the population, including some 350,000 deaths as a direct result of violence.
There is still great concern about humanitarian access in many conflict situations in Africa, as well as in Afghanistan, where security remains a major concern - although considerable gains have been made in Sudan, where access has been a fraught issue.
Humanitarian workers continue to be targeted as well. Relief staff have been attacked or killed in the DRC, Sudan, Burundi, Chechnya, the Occupied Palestinian Territories and, just recently, in Cote d'Ivoire, where four Red Cross volunteers were killed in March.
This gap between rhetoric and reality has repeatedly been highlighted by events in Sudan, where a complex series of interconnected violent conflicts have caused devastation for the civilian population.
On the one hand, for example, Sudanese President Umar Hassan al-Bashir signed a decree in February to set up a national commission on international humanitarian law, welcomed by the ICRC that month as "a major step towards effective implementation of humanitarian law in Sudan, a country that has suffered 19 years of internal conflict."
Barely a week later, on 6 March, the International Crisis Group (ICG) warned that - even as peace talks on Sudan resumed in Kenya - the Khartoum government was "continuing to violate the cessation of hostilities agreement it signed 15 October 2002 with the rebel Sudan Peoples' Liberation Army (SPLA) and reaffirmed on 4 February 2003."
"The primary victims of the violence are civilians," it said, as "government forces and government-sponsored militias were attacking the oilfields of Western Upper Nile in an effort to dislodge the SPLA and expand oil industry development."
Continuous raids by government-sponsored militias along the Bentiu-Adok oil road in Western Upper Nile [Unity State], southern Sudan, were "discouraging the return of civilians who were displaced by the fighting in January and early February, in direct violation of the 4 February agreement by the parties to facilitate such return," the ICG added.
A snapshot from March 2000 of just one of the state and non-state armed groups active in the DRC, Credit: IRIN |
Non-State Actors
A particular problem in trying to secure humanitarian access - and protecting civilian populations, more generally - is that of dealing with armed non-state actors, not all of whom are connected to political structures on which political or diplomatic leverage can be used.
Not only is there a wide range of non-state actors in many conflict situations - from rebel groups to private companies to self-enriching warlords - but the extent to which they recognise, or will live up to, their responsibilities under IHL is very varied, and rarely satisfactory.
The presence of armed non-state actors, who often fail to recognise or live up to international responsibilities regarding access, frequently leads to access being restricted, unpredictable or denied altogether, according to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
"It's often very difficult to know whom it is you're dealing with, where to point the finger of responsibility, not to become complicit in strategies that are actually abusive of civilian populations," says James Darcy of the Humanitarian Policy Groups of the UK-based Overseas Development Institute (ODI).
"Rebel forces will often deliberately blur that distinction; they will indeed take refuge and hide amongst the civilian population. And that makes it extremely hard for humanitarian agencies to know who to deal with and how to conduct themselves."
There is also the link between criminal and 'political' violence to consider, according to analysts, with some armed groups limiting themselves to broadly military activities but others more akin to criminal gangs profiting from the state of general lawlessness that often prevails, with the collapse of civil institutions.
"There is no accountability with people of this kind [profiteering or anarchic] so, yes, I think it creates fundamental problems," Darcy told IRIN.
There are also risks associated with piecemeal and fragmented negotiations for access by humanitarian actors, with combatants frequently trying to play relief agencies against each other to gain a perceived political, tactical or resource advantage - in a way that threatens or diminishes humanitarian space, further endangering access.
But non-state actors are not alone and state parties, too, often fail to fulfil their responsibilities under IHL to allow safe and unimpeded access.
In order to improve humanitarian access, all parties must understand their obligations to civilians and there must be clearly defined conditions for humanitarian access, according to Kofi Annan. Contacts with combatants should be undertaken on a structured and coordinated basis, and tools such as the Security Council aide memoire should be used as a tool for guiding negotiations.
Separation of Armed Elements
Conflict often results in the mixed movements of populations, from forced civilian displacements to armed elements seeking sanctuary in neighbouring districts or countries, and this can lead to dangers from the intermingling of civilians and combatants generally, as well as the movements of combatants into refugee or IDP camps, in particular.
The militarisation of refugee populations, and the need to separate armed elements from refugees and local host populations, is a particular concern for the protection of civilians, Kofi Annan told the UN Security Council in November - especially where refugee camps are located close to border areas and in close proximity to armed conflict.
This may involve the likes of armed groups infiltrating displaced populations, refugee camps or even settled civilian populations, forcing people to act for them - sometimes by fighting for them, sometimes by supplying or feeding them - or endangering them by their presence.
The presence of armed elements among displaced or a refugee population often has "specific and serious humanitarian consequences", especially for women and children who were especially vulnerable, according to Kofi Annan. These included rape, trafficking, forced recruitment, and other forms of physical and sexual abuse, he told the Security Council in November.
In northern Uganda, Sudanese refugees and local populations not only have to contend with numerous problems associated with living in a region wracked by armed conflict - which has ranged, over time, from internal to inter-state and transnational - but also have to live with the daily threat of attack.
Far from being located in a place of safety, these refugees and displaced people still carry most of the burden of a protracted series of armed insurrections and conflicts, perpetrated by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) of Joseph Kony.
More recently, observers say, they are also bearing the brunt of the military strategy - dubbed Operation Iron Fist - by which the Ugandan army, the Uganda People's Defence Forces (UPDF) aims to crush that LRA insurrection, and which has indirectly created the worst humanitarian situation the region has ever seen.
Despite the efforts of UNHCR and partner organisations, refugee camps are sometimes used as recruiting grounds, by armed groups tapping into disaffection with a government or state of affairs.
"I think, increasingly, humanitarian agencies have become conscious that probably the biggest protection issues are precisely those where a civilian population - and often a refugee population - is, in effect, being held to ransom by its own leadership," James Darcy told IRIN. "And that the protection action required is, for instance, demilitarisation of the refugee camp, without which free action - free of fear - on behalf of the civilian population is just impossible."
Refugees - and IDPs - are sometimes intimidated, abused, violated or even killed as a result of the breakdown of social systems, and the easy resort to violent means, in situations of conflict.
In such cases, a protection agenda may include education and training, self-protection and particular focus on especially vulnerable (such as unaccompanied or separated children) to the location, design and layout of refugee or IDP camps, human rights training or promotion of food security and income generation possibilities (to reduce individuals' vulnerability).
Funding is a major problem in conflict and post-conflict situations, with the resources available often inadequate to provide for basic food, water and shelter needs - not to mind broader protection issues, which have not always been an integral part of humanitarian interventions.
May 2002 - Refugee children returning to an unstable and war-torn Burundi are confronted with an uncertain future. This young boy had lived his entire life to that point in refugee camps in Tanzania, Credit: U.S. Committee for Refugees |
Refugee protection
The office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has developed a wide-ranging Agenda for Protection aimed at preserving the humanitarian character of asylum as well as the physical safety of refugees.
It emphasises the primary responsibility of refugee-hosting states to ensure asylum retains its humanitarian character, calls for disarmament of armed elements and covers the identification, separation and internment of combatants. However, the reality is not nearly so neat.
Liberian refugees in Cote d'Ivoire, which has been wracked by civil strife in recent months, fear for their lives. They say they are harassed. Some of them have been killed. For about 35,000 who still remain in the country, life has become increasingly difficult, according to a recent IRIN Interview with the Acting Representative of UNHCR for Cote d'Ivoire, Panos Moumtzis.
Local populations in Tabou received information from fellow citizens in Grabo that Liberians had been involved in looting, killings and violations of the human rights of Ivorians, he said. As a result, they felt the traditional hospitality that had existed for Liberians for many years could no longer continue.
UNHCR in collaboration with local authorities and the government has tried to counter this sentiment, trying to tell people that these were refugees who had not participated in atrocities or crimes. The situation calmed down a bit.
But in Guiglo, western Cote d'Ivoire, Liberian refugees are really worried and afraid because Nicla refugee camp, with a population of up to 8,000, is close to the frontline, he added.
Meanwhile, recent research in the DRC has suggested that the influx of refugees into the country was one factor, among others, that "strongly caused the proliferation of light weapons", which are the main cause of civilian death in the continuing conflict.
Northeastern DRC has been a sanctuary for people fleeing earlier or ongoing wars in Rwanda, Sudan and Uganda, according to the report from three Kinshasa-based researchers commissioned by the NGO Pax Christi/ Netherlands.
"These refugees came into DRC with their [concealed] weapons and started to resell them so as to survive - and they launched out in this illicit traffic of light weapons either as salesmen, brokers or traders," they said in the report, titled "Proliferation and Illicit Traffic of Small Arms and Light Weapons in the Northeast of the DRC." [Click here for the IRIN story]
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has recommended to the Security Council, among other measures: - Encouraging greater commitment by governments to remove refugee and IDP camps from border areas, and to separate combatants from civilians;
- Support of the capacity of law in states hosting refugees in order to secure refugee and IDP situations fairly and calmly;
- Promotion of the Security Council's aide memoire on civilian protection by governments where combatants and civilians are intermingled, in order to assure that responses to security threats meet international standards.
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Sierra Leone have paved the way for the recently-established International Criminal Court (ICC), Credit: UN |
Rule of law, justice and reconciliation
Restoring the rule of law, which often breaks down in war situations - especially in protracted conflicts - is considered vital to a return to a situation of sustainable peace, based on the assured protection of civilians and the return of civil order.
For the regular rule of law to really take hold during a transition from armed conflict, humanitarian workers stress, one of the first priorities has to be a comprehensive programme of disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) of former combatants. Longer term, this will also involve long term investment in education, training, family and community support.
But, more closely connected to IHL, such a transition also involves justice, reconciliation and accountability for war crimes. In order to provide for this, the impunity with which armed actors violate IHL must be ended, and en effective system of deterrence established, according to observers.
Situations of armed violence frequently generate the most appalling of crimes, including massacres, summary executions, death by starvation or disease, torture or ill treatment, as well as forced displacement or recruitment to arms, sexual abuse and violence, violations of rights to health, liberty and education, and so on - ad nauseum.
In the overwhelming majority of cases, the victims and their families do not receive justice, and those who kill, torture, rape or attack civilians do so with the expectation of impunity.
The establishment of criminal courts for the former Yugoslavia, for Rwanda and Sierra Leone over the last decade or so has been recognised as an important step in asserting the need for accountability, in order to bind sometimes fragile peace and protect civilians during transition.
Kofi Annan has also highlighted that amnesties for combatants "remain unacceptable to and unrecognisable by the UN unless they exclude genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes" - those offences for which the International Criminal Court has been established.
"The entry into force of the Rome Statute of the ICC marks an important deterrence against war crimes," according to Annan. "The culture of impunity is being challenged."
Many of the issues of law, justice and reconciliation relevant to protection - from restitution of property to land rights- directly relate more to politics than humanitarianism and humanitarian law, yet critically affect them.
"There is a certain point at which what the humanitarian system can deliver stops and where other forms of action are absolutely necessary," explains James Darcy of the ODI's humanitarian policy group.
"So, we see the need for coherence in the sense that there are certain forms of political action that are absolutely, intrinsically connected to humanitarian outcomes."
The issue of deterrence is important as part of a package of incentives for belligerents to respect the rules of war and, in that regard, the establishment of the ICC is viewed by humanitarian workers and IHL advocates as an extremely important development.
In the words of Kofi Annan, justice and reconciliation must work together to address the underlying causes of conflict and to prevent possibly violent retribution.
[ENDS]
|