Mr President,
The Security Council's success is measured by how you overcome global divisions; how you overcome the base definition of politics as one of "you are either with us or against us.” Bridging these differences requires leadership, as it is only leadership that can open the door for meaningful negotiations.
What the International Committee of the Red Cross witnesses today is emboldened warring parties disregarding their legal obligations and, at times, using overly permissive interpretations of international humanitarian law to justify violations, destruction and impediments to humanitarian action.
While we also know this is not systematically the case, unfortunately the collective inertia and acceptance of this abhorrent reality is setting a new threshold for placing humanity on a scale, disregarding the fact that all human lives have equal value.
Normalized and seemingly tolerated misinterpretations of IHL – that happen under the watch of the international community – warp other conflicts far from the public sight. Violations happen with full knowledge of the international community – but with little corrective action.
You must be aware that one conflict informs the other; boundaries are pushed into the zone of the acceptable; and more human suffering follows.
International humanitarian law was created to move beyond division, paving the way from polarization to peace. These laws—treaties your states created and ratified—compel restraint. Under the Geneva Conventions, even your enemy must be treated with humanity. IHL is not transactional.
Let your military commanders understand this: Wars can be fought and won while adhering to the letter and spirit of the law. Afterall, what does victory really mean? Is it the destruction of villages and the killing of civilians?
Annihilation may bring military success, but not political or moral victory. If security systems take over every political decision, you forfeit the option to negotiate.
We commend all members of the Security Council for recalling systematically to the parties in conflict to comply with IHL and for recalling the letter of those obligations. But we must go beyond that, and make sure that the true meaning of international humanitarian law is adhered to.
This means taking all feasible precautions to minimize civilian harm. It means not misrepresenting acceptable proportionality calculations. It means respecting the rules of war even if your enemy does not. It means accepting that neutral humanitarian actors can bring humanitarian assistance to areas your enemy controls. It also means ensuring that hospitals aren’t hit, civilians can flee to safety, and food supplies are not cut off.
Inhumanity fuels violence; preserving humanity fosters de-escalation. States and militaries must fully integrate IHL into their defense strategies, not just for war, but to achieve victory that allows for long-term stability.
We must see the Council’s rhetorical support for IHL put into action. You determine whether the Geneva Conventions are a tool for peace that saves lives.
- When your ally targets civilians, pick up the phone and demand that they stop.
- When your ally refuses ICRC visits to detainees or prisoners of war, pick up the phone and demand compliance.
- When your ally bends the rules of war beyond recognition, use the means you have to stop them.
IHL saves lives. It enabled the release of thousands of detainees in Yemen, the Chibok girls in Nigeria, and helped the ICRC escort orphans to safety in Khartoum. It’s not the law that fails but the will to enforce it.
The chances of protecting the economic interest and security of your own people are best preserved if universally ratified agreements are respected. Because you never know when war may reach your own borders, and you find yourselves on the wrong side of the line. Upholding the Geneva Conventions is in your own core interest.
IHL offers a pathway to peace. Declare it your political priority.
