ICRC 'currently classifying the highest number of armed conflicts since the Second World War'

The nerve gas attacks of World War I, the difficult access to the wounded in the trenches, the treatment of prisoners, that all led to treaties and rules to preserve human life in times of war. It was after the Second World War, 1949, that those rules were further codified with the Geneva Conventions, protecting wounded and sick soldiers, the humane treatment of prisoners, and the protection of civilians, particularly in occupied territories. That brings us to our spotlight segment. She's president of the organization that's at the heart of those Geneva Conventions of 1949. The International Committee of the Red Cross's Mirjana Spoliaric joins us from Geneva. Thank you for being with us here on France 24. It's a pleasure. Thank you. How are the rules of war, the rules to protect civilians and and human... humans in general in war doing in 2026? Look, unfortunately, they're not doing very well. We are currently classifying the highest number of armed conflicts since the Second World War, and it is particularly important today, in view of current escalations, to remember what happened and to come back to the conclusions of 1949, that there's never a lawless space and that there are red lines in war that should never be crossed, unfortunately. We see a more and more permissive interpretation of these rules today. Wars have never ceased since the end of World War II, or even though in 1918 they spoke about the war to end all wars. The wars have not stopped. But you're saying that the rules of war are now being degraded. Why is that? There are a number of reasons. Thank But let me start by saying You know, you may consider war as a human condition, and there's always been wars in human history, but brutality, barbarity, is not a human condition. So the barriers put in place in 1949 prevent things, or should you. prevent things like rape, torture, torture of prisoners of war, should prevent forced displacement, and, you know, generally. atrocities that we are observing in many many conflicts today. Are civilians less protected than they were before? We think of the war in Ukraine, we think of what's unfolded in Gaza since 2023. It's just the intensity and the number and the scale of these conflicts is so enormous. You have 11 million people displaced in Sudan with, you know, uncertain futures because they still don't know when they will be able to return back to their regions where war is still ongoing. Gaza is still in the same dire humanitarian situation as it was a year ago. Nothing has really improved. And with the recent flooding, people are, you know, losing their lives again. We are counting the highest number of missing people between Russia and Ukraine. Again, the highest number in a conflict since the Second World War. New technologies, the fact that under international watch, the boundaries are being pushed towards... More and more civilian suffering, also by attacking systematically civilian infrastructures, are a very dangerous trend that we have to reverse today. That attacking systematically of civilian infrastructure, are you pointing the finger at Russia when you say that? We see this being applied in almost every conflict today. And it comes in direct combination with the employment of drones. What we see are protracted conflicts and the parties running out of military targets, so they turn towards civilian infrastructures also to increase the pressures on the civilian populations and ultimately also try to displace as many people as possible in a short period of time as a means of warfare. So humans. are instrumentalized in the pursuit of military objectives. And you point out that somehow AI has had a role in this. Look, AI has positive sides and negative sides. And we were for a long time told that AI would increase the precision of... Weapons and reduce civilian casualties, but we see the contrary in the different war zones. What we see are more attacks on civilians, more dangers for civilians and, you know, reduce possibilities for civilians to flee from situations of conflict because of the drones and because of the drones following them. It is also a challenge for us as humanitarians. The what do you do? You mentioned Sudan earlier. What do you do when you see there that drone warfare has given, if you will, if you will, a second life to the to the to those fighting the conflict? It seems though the war is getting gotten worse in the past year, not better as a result of drone warfare. What can be done? We need, first and foremost, now states coming together And, you know, negotiate normative frameworks that would reduce some of the most dangerous impacts of the combination between drones, new technologies, and especially artificial intelligence and warfare. We need to, you know, prohibit certain types of weapons, especially autonomous weapons targeting humans. And these negotiations have to happen immediately because we need to prevent. Worse things from happening now. We are still in a phase where AI is used with relative levels of constraints in the deployment of weapons and weapon systems. But this will change very quickly because the trajectory points in that direction. Now, the ICRC is that organization that talks to both sides, that facilitates prisoner swaps. Are you feeling a little lonely these days when it comes to all the issues we've mentioned, what with the degrading of the organization you used to serve under, the UN, which has lost many of its means and in last week's even announced the closing of some of its peacekeeping missions? It is true that physically the presence of international actors has been reduced due to mainly financial constraints but also increasing barriers to the provision of humanitarian assistance and maybe also a reduced trust in international cooperation that we've observed over the last decade or two. So in parts of Yemen, we are more or less the only international actor on the ground providing assistance and the same applied to Gaza for many months during the conflict, where we remained the only ones present with international staff. This increases the challenges for us and we need a strong multilateral system to return and to assume, you know, certain provisions and actions that we cannot do because we have a very specific mandate. You know, we depend on a strong international humanitarian system, and that has to continue. Nevertheless, you know, nothing that we receive in terms of financial assistance will be able to match the increasing number of conflicts and the humanitarian fallouts that they create. So what we are hoping is that states will come back to prioritizing political negotiations. Investments in prevention and peace building, because that is the only way to really reduce the suffering on the ground today. We are surpassing anyway, under all conditions, the possibility of humanitarian actors to cope with what is happening today. There's a bit of an irony, isn't there? The world's become a smaller place, and yet the biggest powers, the permanent members of the Security Council that have the most clout, the U.S., Russia and China, They don't seem as invested in some of the conflicts that you've named. This is my biggest concern today because we see conflicts overlapping over regions. We see drones traveling over several borders. We see overlapping interests between business, military, and other sectors. And at the same time, we see a regression in terms of diplomacy. And this is a very Not only dangerous, but a very toxic trend that we absolutely have to reverse. And this is also the reason why I've been addressing political leadership at the top levels and why. Two years ago, the ICRC, with six states, launched an initiative that precisely calls for IHL, the Rules of War, to become a political priority, because we have to recognize that if the state leaders don't become seized with this issue, nothing will change. One final question, Mirjana Spoljaric. What can citizens do if they're from the countries that are not one of these big powers? What can they do to help, again, bring this to the attention of the international community, the rules of war, engagement in peace building? Everyone has the means to influence. Every single person is responsible for who they elect, how they hold their governments accountable. And to make sure that, you know, the homework is being done, starting with what needs to be done by each state party to the Geneva Convention, and all states have ratified the Geneva Conventions. You have to instruct your militaries, you have to train your forces, you have to, you know, nationalize the Geneva Conventions, you have to adjust your national legislation to what needs to be done in order to be prepared at war. And if this is not being done at the time when we invest more and more in defense, we will not be ready to cope with the impact of war. And that impact will be first and foremost one on the civilian population. So as a citizen, demand your government to prioritize the rules of war because the wars are coming to your doorstep nowadays much, much faster than in previous years. Mirjana Spoljaric, many thanks for joining us from Geneva. I thank you. Thanks for having me.