Protecting civilians from consequences of conflict

The adage ‘kings’ battle, plebeians perish’ still holds good in contemporaneous geopolitical and geoeconomic tensions. Multidimensional protracted conflicts across regions and States have continued to adversely affect the protection of civilians and brought about catastrophic humanitarian consequences on them. The Global Risks Report 2025 ranked State-based armed conflict as the top risk for 2025.

Torture, suffering, death, injury, forced displacement, and enforced disappearance of civilians have become very common narrations in armed conflicts. Over the course of the 20th century civilian fatalities in war climbed dramatically from 5 per cent at the turn of the century, to 15 per cent during World War-I, to 65 per cent by the end of World War-II, to more than 75 per cent in the wars of the 1990s. It is estimated that in recent times civilians consist of close to 90 per cent of recent war casualties. The plight of women, children, persons with disability and older persons is pathetic. Women and children comprise the most vulnerable section and the vulnerability to radicalisation thrust upon them has increased manifold.

Advertisement

They are the victims of unbelievably horrific atrocities and injustices in State-based armed conflicts. Women often experience violence, forced pregnancy, abduction and sexual abuse and slavery. Violence against women in armed conflicts was devastating over the last two years. Compared with 2021-2022, women were killed in armed conflicts at a rate approximately four times higher between 2023 and 2024. According to causalities recorded by UN Human Rights, 21,480 women and 16,690 children were killed in conflicts during 2023-2024. The Global Outlook Report, “Prospects for Children in 2025: Building Resilient Systems for Children’s Futures” reported that by the end of 2023, 47.2 million children had been displaced by conflict and violence.

The figure for 2025 is expected to rise even higher amidst intensifying conflicts in many parts of the world. It is evident that the mandate of the Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict 1996 to strengthen the protection of children affected by armed conflict has, unfortunately, b e en found grossly violate d. Indiscriminate attacks, disregard for ceasefires and peace agreements, and deepening humanitarian crises, have severely weakened the protection of civilians in relentless hostilities. Protecting civilians during armed conflict is the cornerstone of international humanitarian law (IHL). It provides a robust framework within which civilians and ‘civilian objects’ are protected.

Qualified as “cardinal” and “intransgressible”, the principle of distinction – set out in Articles 48 and 52 of Additional Protocol to the Geneva conventions – draws a line between civilians and combatants, and also prohibits any attacks directly targeting civilians or civilian objects. A civilian, according to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and its Additional Protocols of 1977, is any person not belonging to one of the categories of combatants and is protected from the dangers of armed conflict. So, it is the fundamental right of civilians to enjoy general protection against dangers that may arise from hostilities, unless they directly take part.

Moreover, IHL also protects specific civilian groups such as women, children, refugees and displaced persons. The fundamental guarantees laid down in the IHL prohibit torture, degrading treatment, collective punishments, sexual violence, enforced disappearance, slavery, hostage taking and unfair trials during armed conflicts. Given the moral stigma attached to the victimisation of civilians, why are noncombatants frequently targeted despite the widespread belief that it is not only wrong but also illegal according to international law? Gone are the days when safety and protection of civilians in armed conflicts was considered war-priority as exemplified in Ernest Hemingway’s “the old man at the bridge”. In yesteryears, participation of civilians in armed conflicts remained relatively distant. But in recent times the pattern of conflicts has changed significantly. The focus has shifted away from distinct battlefields into populated areas. Urbicide and domicide have become a part and parcel of recent armed conflicts.

It is obser ve d that civilian victimisation has become a military strategy chosen by political or military elites. The objectives of such victimisation are to satiate the appetite of belligerents to conquer and annex a neighbour’s territory. The conqueror viewed population in hostile territories as a perceived threat. Attackers often move quickly to eliminate the threat rather than leave it in place. Moreover, targeting civilians generates an impression among indigenous people that their government is unable to protect them any further from casualties of armed conflicts. Instilling terror among entire communities, affecting their mental health, and driving mass and prolonged displacement have become common features of victimising civilians in armed conflicts. With the adoption of sophisticated technologies in conflicts, deliberate harm has been inflicted on civilians.

Application of cyber tools, autonomous weapon systems, and artificial intelligence exert devastating consequences for the protection of civilians in contemporary armed conflict. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) estimated that at the end of 2024, 123.2 million people worldwide were forcibly displaced due to persecution, conflict, violence, human rights violations and other events seriously disturbing the public order. This is an increase of 7 million people compared to the end of 2023. Even after the protection provided by international law, why is victimisation of civilians still rampant in armed conflict? It is quite evident that blatant violations and permissive interpretations of international humanitarian law, disregard for ceasefires and peace agreements in more than 120 armed conflicts endured in Middle East and North Africa, Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America took an immense toll on civilians.

According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, lack of respect for IHL continues to be the single most important challenge for protecting people in armed conflicts. Indeed, “geopolitical recession” dives deep into the dangers of unilateralism taking hold in national security considerations and highlights the worsening humanitarian impacts of ongoing conflicts. Added to this is the galloping increase in military spending. Higher military spending has significantly amplified the human cost of combat. The theory of critical deterrence – the idea that military spending may reduce the risk of conflict by increasing its expected costs – has yielded modest gains in deterrence. Marking the largest annual increase since 1988, global military expenditure spiralled to $2.718 trillion in 2024, up 9.4 per cent from 2023. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), military spending now accounts for 2.5 per cent of global GDP.

In parallel to military spending, the human cost of armed conflict is also getting grim. Great power confrontation has returned to levels of such intensity that a sustainably peaceful outcome is far from certain. It is time for governments to put pressure on all parties to a conflict to protect civilians, halt arms transfer to armies and groups that violate international law and end impunity so that perpetrators face justice. In the Pact for the Future, adopted in September 2024, Member States, in accordance with international law, committed themselves to restrict or refrain from, as appropriate, the use of explosive weapons in populated areas when their use may be expected to cause harm to civilians and essential civilian infrastructure, schools, medical facilities and places of worship. This is an important alignment with the Political Declaration of 2022 on “Strengthening the Protection of Civilians from the Humanitarian Consequences Arising from the Use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas.

In October 2024, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement adopted its Movement Action Plan to prevent and respond to the Humanitarian Impacts of War in Cities, for the period 2022–2027, reflecting a shared recognition of the human cost of urban warfare and a commitment to improving the protection of civilians. Protecting civilians from the effects of war has never b e en easy. Global collaboration is essential at this critical juncture for human development. States, civil society and international organisations should take steps in order to be more responsive, effective and more unified in protecting civilians in the armed conflict of today and tomorrow.

(The writer is Principal Secretary, Faculty Council for Postgraduate Studies in Science, University of North Bengal.)