Latest news with #InternationalHumanitarianLaw
Arab News
a day ago
- Politics
- Arab News
Saudi Border Guard, SCIHL drive humanitarian progress at Riyadh event
RIYADH: A course aiming to promote awareness of international humanitarian law and enhance its implementation in Saudi Arabia took place on Wednesday in Riyadh. The Introduction to International Humanitarian Law course was organized by the Kingdom's national Standing Committee of International Humanitarian Law, or SCIHL, in partnership with the General Directorate of Border Guard, with the participation of more than 500 military and civilian personnel. The three-day course took place at the Border Guard headquarters and included a series of specialized lectures addressing key topics such as cyber operations within the framework of international humanitarian law and the role of civilian and military media in times of armed conflict. The program also featured a high-level panel discussion titled 'The Importance of Enforcing International Humanitarian Law at the National Level,' delivered by a select group of experts. SCIHL secretary-general counselor, Abdullah Al-Ruwaili, told Arab News that the diverse attendance reflected the high level of confidence participants place in the professionalism of the organizing bodies, particularly the SCIHL and the General Directorate of Border Guards. Al-Ruwaili said that the relevance and timing of the course — amid escalating challenges related to conflicts and emerging technologies — were key factors behind the significant turnout. The diversity of the course's themes — encompassing legal, cyber and media aspects — played a key role in drawing a wide audience of practitioners and stakeholders, according to the secretary general. The interactive approach and the participation of prominent experts fostered a rich environment for dialogue and the exchange of expertise, Al-Ruwaili said. He said that confidence in the professionalism of the organizing bodies and their commitment to the quality of content and outcomes were among the key factors behind the engagement and positive feedback from participants. The joint organization of the course by the SCIHL and the Border Guard stands as a distinguished example of national institutional synergy in the implementation of international humanitarian law, he added. By combining the committee's legal and academic expertise with the directorate's provision of a practical, field-based setting for in-depth dialogue, the initiative successfully integrated theoretical frameworks with real-world application — substantially enhancing the quality and impact of the training content, Al-Ruwaili said. 'This collaboration stands as a testament to the Border Guard's dedication to strengthening its capabilities in accordance with international humanitarian values and principles. It represents a leading example of synergy between legal and security institutions — one that holds potential for broader application across various sectors,' Al-Ruwaili said. The joint organization of the course by the SCIHL and the Border Guard stands as a distinguished example of national institutional synergy in the implementation of international humanitarian law, he added. By combining the committee's legal and academic expertise with the directorate's provision of a practical, field-based setting for in-depth dialogue, the initiative successfully integrated theoretical frameworks with real-world application — substantially enhancing the quality and impact of the training content, Al-Ruwaili said. 'This collaboration stands as a testament to the Border Guard's dedication to strengthening its capabilities in accordance with international humanitarian values and principles. It represents a leading example of synergy between legal and security institutions — one that holds potential for broader application across various sectors,' Al-Ruwaili said.
Leaders
a day ago
- Politics
- Leaders
Iran Fired Banned Cluster Munitions against Israel: Amnesty
Amnesty International accused Iran on Thursday of firing cluster munitions at Israel during the recent conflict between the two nations. This war, which erupted in June, raised serious concerns about civilian safety. The human rights organization highlighted that these widely banned weapons endangered innocent lives. According to Amnesty, Iranian forces launched ballistic missiles containing submunitions into populated residential areas of Israel. The organization cited new research that analyzed photos and videos of the attacks. Reports indicate that on June 19, cluster munitions struck the Gush Dan metropolitan area near Tel Aviv. Furthermore, Amnesty reported that the southern city of Beersheba experienced similar attacks on June 20. Rishon LeZion, located south of Tel Aviv, also faced bombardment on June 22. These strikes left multiple impact craters consistent with the submunitions observed in Gush Dan. Violation of International Humanitarian Law Erika Guevara Rosas, senior director at Amnesty International, stated, 'By using such weapons in or near populated residential areas, Iranian forces endangered civilian lives.' She emphasized that the deliberate use of inherently indiscriminate weapons constitutes a blatant violation of international humanitarian law. Cluster munitions explode mid-air, scattering bomblets across a wide area. Tragically, some of these bomblets fail to detonate upon impact, posing long-term risks, especially to children. Neither Iran nor Israel is a signatory to the 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions. This international treaty prohibits the use, transfer, production, and storage of cluster bombs. Amnesty International reiterated that international law prohibits the use of inherently indiscriminate weapons. Launching indiscriminate attacks that kill or injure civilians constitutes a war crime. The conflict between Israel and Iran began with an Israeli bombing campaign on June 13. Israel claimed these strikes aimed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, a goal that Tehran has consistently denied. Short link : Post Views: 28
News18
17-07-2025
- Politics
- News18
Proportionality In Times Of Asymmetric Warfare
In a world where asymmetry has become the norm, there is a need to push the limits of proportionality At a time when the world finds itself engulfed in overlapping crises—the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, the war between Iran and Israel, the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, and, closer to home, the violence in Myanmar—the question that repeatedly surfaces is that of 'proportionality'. We live at a time when the sky has become a battleground and drone attacks redefine notions of accountability. In this context, the doctrine of proportionality finds itself both, invoked and interrogated. This cardinal principle of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is no longer being merely referenced, it is being distorted, challenged, and sometimes even misused. With every retaliatory strike undertaken by a sovereign state, proportionality becomes a tool of political cudgel. Proportionality, in its most distilled legal form, is about equilibrium: the requirement that the anticipated military advantage of an attack not be outweighed by the incidental harm to civilians. The St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868, a foundational text of IHL, enshrined this moral-legal compromise: the necessities of war must be reconciled with the laws of humanity. But this balance has become infinitely more precarious in contemporary warfare where Non-State Actors embed themselves within civilian populations; where states are forced to confront transnational terrorism with 'measured' force; and where the boundaries between principles and policy in warfare grow obscure each passing day. Against this backdrop, take a look at India's Operation Sindoor. It was New Delhi's response to the April 22nd Pahalgam terrorist attack perpetrated by Pakistan, and targeted innocent Hindu tourists. India's retaliatory strike on terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan was described by India as 'focused, measured, and non-escalatory". This is a phrase that mirrors proportionality's ethical objectives. No Pakistani military establishments were targeted. India's deliberate choice underscored the intent to not cross escalation thresholds while also reaffirming deterrence. While India was praised for offering a powerful lesson in restraint, there were a few instances where India's response was called 'an act of war" and 'regrettable". This mostly came from Pakistan, and its all-weather ally, China. However, it does push us to think: Can proportionality, as traditionally conceived, account for state responses to threats posed by terrorist organizations often sheltered by complicit regimes like Pakistan? Proportionality in counterinsurgency is a vital wing of modern-day warfare, albeit evolving. It is an extension of the application of IHL. While IHL developed primarily for conflicts between states, present times force a revamp of the principle. This is because modern-day wars are fought in the non-international armed conflict (NIAC) setting—where state actors often engage with non-state actors. Scholars remain divided on this, exposing the unresolved contours of proportionality in counterterrorism and counterinsurgency. Maintaining the status quo on the application of proportionality may, inadvertently, promote insurgencies by giving them a safe space. Insurgents exploit those spaces as operational bases that have dense civilian population, as states avoid attacking such areas due to fears of legal overreach, thereby making them de facto sanctuaries. Governments face a grim dilemma: risk civilian harm and face accusations of war crimes; or abstain from targeting these zones and give tactical advantage to the insurgents. The strategy of civilian camouflage is being increasingly employed in wars all around the globe. In such cases, proportionality risks becoming a weapon in the insurgent's arsenal and not a legal standard for the state to follow. Moreover, the principle of proportionality must not be examined in isolation from its moral cousin: the principle of distinction. This principle states that protection is afforded not to places or objects per se, but to those not actively participating in hostilities. The challenge is that modern, asymmetric warfare has effectively erased this line. Whatever remains of it is becoming increasingly porous as insurgents seek cover among the innocent civilians. India's Operation Sindoor, therefore, can become a case study in how proportionality can and should function in modern conflicts and warfare. By targeting only terrorist camps, calibrating intensity to match the provocation, and abstaining from escalation, India not only affirmed its sovereign right to self-defense but did so within the parameters of legal and ethical warfare. It not only kept the lines of communication open with Pakistan, but also reassured them that India's fight was with terrorism, and not Pakistan and its civilians. This stands in contrast to the prevailing pattern of permissiveness that increasingly defines contemporary, global anti-terror operations. For example, data shows that the United States has killed more than 1,000 people in counterterrorism operations in Yemen. There is growing concern about whether necessity and proportionality are being gradually hollowed out in the name of realpolitik. To conclude, it must be underscored that the principle of proportionality is not broken; however, it is being increasingly challenged. Proportionality is a crucial principle that acts as a safeguard against unchecked violence. However, the time has come to revisit the principle – not by recalibrating the standards, but by its application. In a world where asymmetry has become the norm, there is a need to push the limits of proportionality. Esha Banerji is presently associated with a premier think-tank in India, specialising in defence, security, and strategic studies. Her research interest and focuses of analysis are defence strategy, geo-economics, foreign affairs, and the implications of Chinese security developments on the region, especially India. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. view comments Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Express Tribune
14-07-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
Weaponised aid
In what is meant to be a military confrontation according to Israeli armed forces, the Israeli government has brutally leveraged their manipulative rhetoric to paint every Palestinian - whether young or old - as a military threat. This is what allows them to circumvent accountability when they herd Palestinian people into groups and shoot them like cattle for sacrifice. Earlier this year, Israel bombed hospitals, schools and encampments for displaced Palestinians: supposed protected sites under the Geneva Conventions and International Humanitarian Law. Recently, in the past six weeks, Israel has killed around 800 Palestinians near aid distribution sites, including US- and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's (GHF) sites. The GHF operations started in late May, almost five months after Israel's blockade of aid delivery to the Gaza Strip that amplified prospects of famine. GHF is an American organisation that claims to provide a better alternative to previous aid distribution sites in Gaza which, according to Israel, were being hijacked by Hamas to divert aid. But it is merely another death trap by the Israeli military to exacerbate its genocide - which is also the reason termed by several international relief organisations for refusing to cooperate with GHF. The sheer cruelty of first starving a population, then using the offer of food as pretext for further violence seems to be lost on a world that is simply not doing enough to put an end to it. While Israel simply backtracks on its genocidal actions at aid distribution sites by calling them "lessons learned" after being rebuked by the UN, the Palestinian population chooses whether to die by starvation or die trying to obtain food and medicine. With every passing month, humanitarian appeals grow more desperate. Palestinians now ask only to feed themselves, not even for peace. Those in power must act before the world grows numb to these horrors.
Scoop
09-07-2025
- Health
- Scoop
GAZA: Siege On Fuel Could Cut Off Supplies Of Clean Water To About 44,000 Children Supported By Save The Children
Fuel shortages in Gaza could cut off supplies of clean drinking water to about 44,000 children supported by Save the Children in a matter of days, increasing the risk of waterborne illnesses such as cholera, diarrhoea and dysentery, with these children only a small number of those impacted by fuel running out. Save the Children relies on fuel to transport safe, clean water daily to over 50 communities across the Gaza Strip, including about 44,072 children. But fuel supplies have been entirely restricted from entering Gaza since Israeli authorities imposed a total siege on 2 March, putting the entire humanitarian response at risk of grinding to a halt. Access to safe water is a fundamental human right, critical not just for drinking but for staving off disease that is rife across Gaza, where nearly everyone now lives in crowded shelters and tents having been displaced multiple times. Acute watery diarrhoea - one of the world's biggest killers of children - is present in 39% of people seeking medical consultations, according to the UN, and malnutrition is rife. The child rights organisation said it is critical - and obligatory under International Humanitarian Law - that Israeli authorities fully lift the siege on fuel and aid in parallel to current ceasefire talks, and that humanitarian access - and children's lives - are not used as bargaining chips in negotiations. Other aid organisations have sounded the alarm about their own operations as fuel supplies dry up, impacting water, sanitation and any remaining health facilities The UN is warning that hundreds of newborn babies in incubators are at imminent risk of death in a matter of days if the power goes off. Ahmad Alhendawi, Save the Children's Regional Director for the Middle East, Eastern Europe and North Africa, said: " Access to safe water is a fundamental human right. But in Gaza, it could now be denied to 44,072 children we deliver it to as fuel runs dry. "Not only is food and aid being withheld to an entire population on the brink - fuel that powers the systems that are critical for survival has not been allowed in for four months. This lack of fuel is posing a severe threat to the entire humanitarian response across Gaza. "There is no time to waste. While a definitive, lasting ceasefire is desperately needed to spare children from bombs and bullets, talks should not distract from the desperate need inside Gaza for fuel, aid and commercial supplies. These should not be used as bargaining chips - children need both safety and life-sustaining resources, as is their right and the Government of Israel's obligation to provide under international humanitarian law. The siege must immediately be lifted." Save the Children is on the ground in Gaza, as we have been for decades, ready to deliver lifesaving aid alongside our partners. Our teams deliver lifesaving water, run child-friendly spaces that offer safe places for children to play and receive psychosocial support, and set up temporary learning centres to help children continue their education during the crisis. Save the Children is running a primary healthcare centre in Deir Al-Balah, providing essential services to children, mothers, and families, including screening and treatment for malnutrition. About Save the Children NZ: Save the Children works in 120 countries across the world. The organisation responds to emergencies and works with children and their communities to ensure they survive, learn and are protected. Save the Children NZ currently supports international programmes in Fiji, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Laos, Nepal, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea. Areas of work include child protection, education and literacy, disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation, and alleviating child poverty.
