The world is testing the limits of humanitarian law
Last summer, the International Development Committee highlighted the huge global challenges facing international humanitarian law through permissive interpretations and a lack of compliance.
More than six months later, I would have liked to say the world is turning a corner. That progress is being restored on rules to protect civilians from violent and lawless actors who behave with impunity.
Unfortunately, the reality is depressingly different. The internationally agreed conventions on conflict are falling apart, and UK parliamentarians and policy makers need to make defending IHL a political priority.
Recent conflicts – most notably in Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan - have placed IHL under unprecedented strain. Too many leaders on the world stage now seem to think that power is the only language to use. “There are those that believe the power of law should be replaced by the law of power," was how UN chief António Guterres put it recently.
Throughout our inquiry on the topic, we were frequently told that the international laws in place are robust and fit for purpose. We heard that IHL is clear and comprehensive. It represents both a body of law that is robust and universal in its coverage, and a spirit by which warring parties must place the protection of civilians, journalists and health workers at the heart of their operational planning.
The big missing parts of the jigsaw are the serious deficiencies in the enforcement mechanisms and the apparent inability of the international community to hold states and non-state actors accountable for violations of that law and its spirit.
Breaches of international humanitarian law are not new, or the exclusive preserve of powerful leaders. In 2021, the International Development Committee’s report on tackling the sexual exploitation and abuse of aid beneficiaries found that sexual offences in humanitarian situations were overwhelmingly being carried out by UN peacekeeping troops.
Now urban warfare, new technologies and protracted conflicts are testing the limits of IHL, while on the world stage, we are increasingly seeing states preferring to act through aggression rather than influence.
In the face of this, we have to ensure that we do not turn a blind eye to breaches at the expense of unconditional support for international humanitarian law. Whether the aggressor is friend or foe, we should be implementing the legislation, holding people accountable and allowing the courts to do their job.
There has previously been encouraging collaboration by some UN Member States, including the UK. In 2024 we joined Australia, Jordan, Switzerland, Indonesia, Sierra Leone, Japan, Brazil and Colombia in getting behind a ministerial-level initiative promoting adherence to IHL and the protection of aid workers. The UK is also one of 99 states to have joined the Global Initiative on International Humanitarian Law, launched in September 2024 by Brazil, China, France, Jordan, Kazakhstan, and South Africa to strengthen respect for the rules of war and protect civilians.
As one of the 99, the UK should be applying the same rules and regulations whether we are dealing with a state that has a seat at a table we sit at, a group of terrorists or UN peacekeeping troops. There is a suite of things we can do from sanctions to trade negotiations to travel bans, but we need to make much better use of all the tools we have at our disposal.
Of course, the significant cuts we are seeing to UK funding for international development are not helping. My committee’s recent report on the FCDO’s approach to displaced people found that the department had failed to learn the lessons of previous cuts to stabilisation, peacebuilding and deconfliction programming. We found that this had likely contributed to the early escalation of the conflict in Sudan – the largest humanitarian crisis ever recorded – going unchallenged.
Following the publication of our report and wider parliamentary scrutiny of the crisis in Sudan the Government imposed targeted sanctions on senior commanders involved in appalling atrocities in El Fasher, North Darfur. I applaud my colleagues who helped make that happen. But the reality is that in recent years the UK, along with other nations, too often is slow to act on breaches of international humanitarian law.
Despite welcome collaboration and steps in the right direction by a select few UN Member States, the International Development Committee found a lack of comprehensive leadership across all aspects of IHL by a single Member State. As we enter the final year of the Global Initiative to Galvanize Political Commitment to IHL, the time has come for this to stop. Someone needs to take a stand, and the UK should step up. If not, it could soon be too late to retrieve the protections that IHL provide to us all.
Sarah Champion is the Labour MP for Rotherham and Chair of the International Development Select Committee.
