Respect for laws of war ‘urgently needed’: Red Cross chief

GENEVA: Amid a proliferation of brutal armed conflicts, Red Cross chief Mirjana Spoljaric decried the disregard shown for the internationally agreed laws of war, with disastrous consequences on the ground, in an interview.

“What we see are constant violations of international humanitarian law in a fast-rising number of compiling conflicts,” Spoljaric, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, said this week.

“We need to come back to acknowledging that the key to bringing peace is respect for humanity.”

But that respect appears to be in short supply amid a record number of armed conflicts — more than 120 raging around the world, the ICRC chief said.

In numerous conflicts, including the crushing civil war in Sudan, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and Israel’s escalating wars targeting Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, there seems to be little effort to spare civilians.

“The numbers of civilian casualties that we see today (and) that high and fast-rising number of displaced people are unacceptable,” Spoljaric said.

“Better compliance with international humanitarian law ... is urgently needed.”

Known as the laws of war and enshrined in the Geneva Conventions, international humanitarian law consists of a set of rules that seek, for humanitarian reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict, protect civilians and civilian objects and impose limits on the means and methods of warfare.

This is “a very practical set of norms,” Spoljaric said, including requiring “the respect for medical facilities” and proper treatment of prisoners of war.

“It also requires that when civilian populations are requested to evacuate, that they can do so in safety, (and are) provided with the possibility to go to places where they will find security (and) access to food and water, to shelter and medical assistance,” she said.

“There are a lot of measures enshrined in the humanitarian treaties that allow for the reduction of unnecessary and senseless suffering of the civilian population in times of armed conflict.”

The ICRC, the caretaker of the Geneva Conventions, will co-organize an international conference with the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to focus heavily on boosting compliance with international law.

It should be “a no-brainer,” Spoljaric said, pointing out that “all states have ratified the Geneva Conventions and committed to preserving humanity when things become very complicated.”

“Unfortunately, that is not the reality on the ground.”

In line with the ICRC’s mandate to act as a neutral intermediary between belligerents in a conflict, Spoljaric did not point fingers.

But she voiced severe concern about a growing tendency in conflicts, including in the Middle East, Sudan, and Myanmar, where there has been a “collapse of entire health systems.”

“Why is this necessary in achieving military goals?” she asked, stressing that this raises serious questions about how parties interpret the “principles of distinction and proportionality in the conduct of military operations.”

She slammed the “undermining and hollowing out (of) international humanitarian law to the extent where it allows you anything in the conduct of hostilities to achieve your military goals.”

She said one of the biggest challenges was “the notion that the enemy has to be completely defeated and that the enemy can be completely defeated.”

“It’s against the spirit of international humanitarian law to assume that you are allowed to dehumanize the other in the interest of your safety and security and preserving the safety of your people,” she insisted.

She pointed out that the Geneva Conventions were adopted in 1949 to help avert a repeat of the brutality witnessed during the Second World War.

“We don’t want to go back there,” Spoljaric said.

“We don’t want to go back to a situation where you can destroy the other no matter how much it costs.”