Educational Resources

• Interactives
• International Humanitarian Law in 10 Minutes
• Links

International Humanitarian Law in 10 Minutes

A 10 minute exercise to demonstrate to participants the motivation conflicting parties have to protect non-combatants from harm.  

• Supplies required:
  • Chart paper
  • Markers

Set the stage for the participants by telling them that they are citizens in a country that is about to go to war.  The two countries that are about to fight each other have decided that they are going to create some rules by which the war will be fought.  Divide the group in two, to represent the two countries, and tell them that they have become advisors to their respective governments, and that they are going to create, and then negotiate the lists.

1. Ask participants to imagine they are advisors to their government.  They are about to go to war with a neighbouring country.
2. Their government has asked for advice.  Both countries have agreed to set up a list of people and things that they promise not to attack, as long as the other side doesn’t attack them either.
3. The government is only prepared to avoid attacking people and things that cannot help them win the war.
4. Each group should brainstorm the people and things they recommend protecting.  They should make a list of the things on the chart paper.  Protected groups can include things like hospitals, schools, civilians, wounded soldiers etc.  You can give them hints and suggestions.
5. Once the two lists are made, have the groups come back together and begin to go over their lists.  They should both agree on the things that are to be protected. 
6. Point out to them that by listing things like civilians, prisoners of war, wounded soldiers, hospitals, schools, food and water supplies, that they have agreed to provide protection similar to that of International Humanitarian Law.
7. Follow up discussion should include looking at the following questions:  What are the advantages of fighting by the rules?  What are the consequences of breaking them?

List of protected places and things:

• Schools, hospitals, religious building, historical monuments, government buildings
• Civilians, residential areas, recreational areas
• Water and food supplies, etc.

Participants may also include things like bridges, roads, airports and factories on their lists.  Both sides will most likely not agree to protect these things as they could be vital to a war effort, and therefore a legitimate military target.  In this situation, it is possible to comply with the spirit of International Humanitarian Law, for example by attacking factories in the middle of the night, when they will not be full of civilian workers.  The effect of war on civilians should always be minimized.

Why would a country not be willing to comply with International Humanitarian Law?

• Thinking one side of the conflict can bully the enemy into submission
• Responding to threats or actions from the other side
• Not taking the time to consider the consequences for their own people (or not caring)
• Believing that all is fair in war

What are the potential consequences of non-compliance with the law?

• Retribution/retaliation – if one side begins attacking civilians, then they will most likely be attacked themselves
• Escalation – as attacks become more indiscriminate, the war could get out of control
• Outside intervention and international pressure

Advantages to complying with International Humanitarian Law

• Self Interest – Long term interest (even if you’re winning), what if you need protection at some point?
• International image
• Reciprocity (fear of retaliation)– if you take care of the POWs, the same will be done for your soldiers
• Emotion vs. Logic – logically the rules make sense, but in the heat of the battle things can get out of hand.  Having neutral observers can assist in preventing the deterioration of the situation. 
• Enforcement –must enforce IHL within their territory.  If a state violates IHL, then the international community must put pressure on the violator.  The Red Cross tries to influence states and make recommendations
• Return to peace – When serious violations have occurred, this is harder to achieve

Posted: August 29, 2008