This article discusses the rising threats posed by the use of explosive weapons in populated areas for principled and safe humanitarian access in conflict settings. It shares opportunities to address this issue that were identified during a Humanity & Inclusion-led multistakeholder workshop on effective implementation of the Political Declaration. In doing so, this article highlights the importance of enhancing and adapting safety management of humanitarian actors, engaging in dialogue between humanitarian and military actors, and tailoring advocacy to protect humanitarian access in contexts of the use of explosive weapons in populated areas.
Introduction
The use of explosive weapons in populated areas has surged to alarming levels in recent years, leading to devastating short- and long-term consequences for civilians and the humanitarian and health workers trying to assist them. The adoption and endorsement of the Political Declaration on Strengthening the Protection of Civilians from the Humanitarian Consequences arising from the use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas in November 2022 raised hopes that such violence would be curbed in the years to come.
However, the use of explosive weapons in populated areas has increased, as have the number of civilians killed or injured by explosive weapons in places such as Gaza, Sudan, Ukraine, Syria, and many more. Humanitarian actors are also at risk, especially local and national staff and volunteers who serve as first responders to incidents of explosive weapons use.i In 2023, there were at least 470 attacks that affected humanitarian aid efforts across 11 countries and territoriesii. On the occasion of World Humanitarian Day on 19 August 2024, Joyce Msuya, Acting Head of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), condemned the "unacceptable violence against humanitarian workers, which has become increasingly common, with 280 workers killed worldwide in 2023", representing a 137 percent increase compared to 2022 – a record fueled by the war in Gaza.iii
The Political Declaration, endorsed by 87 states as of October 2024, is the first formal international recognition that the use of explosive weapons in populated areas has severe immediate and longer-term consequences for affected individuals and communities.iv In recognition of the vital role played by aid workers in assisting civilian populations in contexts where explosive weapons are or have been used, the Political Declaration includes a commitment to “facilitate rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access to those in need”.v
A multi-stakeholder process was launched in early 2024 that aims to support the effective implementation of the Political Declaration by engaging states and their armed forces, as well as other relevant stakeholders – including the International Committee of the Red Cross, international organisations, humanitarian operators, survivors and civil society – through a series of six collaborative workshops.vi The first workshop took place in May 2024 and aimed to generate key policy materials and recommendations for stakeholders with a focus on safe and principled humanitarian access in contexts of explosive weapons use. The workshop was organized by Humanity & Inclusion - Handicap International, a co-founding member of the International Network on Explosive Weapons (INEW)vii.
Safety risks for humanitarian workers and shrinking humanitarian access
Security threats to humanitarian operations and harm to humanitarian and health workers have immediate consequences on their ability to deliver life-saving assistance to populations. This has longer-term effects on the lives and well-being of civilians who are unable to access essential aid and critical services. Damaged infrastructure, such as roads, can also severely limit the movement of humanitarian workers and their ability to reach affected populations.
The safety of humanitarian personnel and operations is a prerequisite for access and the delivery of life-saving aid and healthcare. However, the urbanisation of war and the widespread use of explosive weapons in populated areas present increasing security risks for humanitarians. The use of explosive weapons has challenged the international community’s existing methods for humanitarian delivery, including international non-governmental organisations’ (INGO) duty of care policies for their local staff and partners, security risk management policies and practices, and donors’ approaches to operational security and project funding.
While safety is a risk across all conflicts, the specific and unique patterns of harm associated with the use of explosive weapons in populated areas, often inherently indiscriminate due to their wide area effects, magnify the security risks of humanitarian and health workers– and that of those in need of assistance. Many current conflicts are characterized by a lack of certainty regarding the level and nature of hostilities in specific locations, the types of weaponry used, and the dynamics or pace of attacks. Explosive weapons, including those launched remotely, serve to exacerbate these dynamics. Similarly, this uncertainty can blur security assessments and operational planning, putting humanitarian actors at risk of being directly exposed to hostilities, and halting access. The specific impacts of the use of explosive weapons on humanitarian access and safety remain largely unaddressed and inadequately acknowledged in EWIPA-related advocacy and policy.
Both endorsing and non-endorsing states of the Political Declaration, as well as non-state armed actors, donors, and humanitarian actors, need to deepen their understanding of the specific risks and impacts of the use of explosive weapons on principled and safe humanitarian access. This enhanced understanding would enable humanitarian operators and donors to better prioritize the safety and protection of humanitarian and health workers in these contexts, including local personnel, by adequately resourcing, adapting, and improving existing safety and security management processes and policies.
The funding gap for aid workers’ safety is exacerbated by donors’ reluctance to fund security costs for local actors, who often lack security risk management capabilities and resources. These local actors are rarely provided with or equipped to meet the highest protection measures and standards in such environments where the use of explosive weapons adds new needs and challenges that require response. Adequate and systematic funding and resources would allow investment in security risk management measures and personnel safety initiatives, enabling humanitarian organizations, including local civil protection operators and local health actors, to operate as safely and effectively as possible in conflict-affected settings, including those in which explosive weapons were used.
Rethinking civil-military dialogue for principled humanitarian access
Improving safety management standards and practices by humanitarian actors is essential to mitigate risks and harm from hostilities. However, the main preventive measure for protecting humanitarians lies in their acceptance and distinction by parties to conflict. The respect for humanitarian actors' work and, consequently, for access to humanitarian services by affected populations – a general obligation under international humanitarian law recalled in the Political Declaration – faces specific challenges in and urban settings and in the context of the use of explosive weapons in populated areas. The use of such weapons and their potential indiscriminate effects should necessitate an even closer duty and effort for effective and genuine implementation of the principles of precaution and distinction for humanitarian and civilian persons and objects in the planning and operations of armed actors. Given its specific risks, the use of explosive weapons in populated areas requires even more proactive and adaptive risk assessments and context-specific mitigation strategies on the part of armed actors to better safeguard humanitarian personnel and operations.
Workshop participants highlighted the importance of humanitarian and civil-military relations and coordination mechanisms, as well as the need for humanitarian practices to evolve and adapt to the new realities of urban warfare. As discussed, the increasing and widespread use of explosive weapons in populated areas challenges the relevance and effectiveness of existing humanitarian and civil-military mechanisms and arrangements, including notification systems (also known as “deconfliction”), humanitarian corridors, evacuations, and humanitarian ceasefires, especially when international humanitarian law is ignored by parties to conflict. The distinct pattern of harm caused by the use of explosive weapons in populated areas has also led actors engaged in the planning and delivery of humanitarian aid to reconsider how they engage and negotiate with conflict parties. They must assess the specific risks such engagements pose to the perception of their neutrality, impartiality, and independence, which could have potential safety consequences.
Coordinated interactions between armed actors and humanitarians in these contexts can be vital. Improving the lines of communication, both formal and informal, between armed actors and humanitarian operators could provide timely and relevant information for the safety management of humanitarian operations. The success of communication between humanitarian actors and conflict parties often hinges on finding the right entry point for dialogue and establishing a shared humanitarian language. One important point also highlighted during the workshop was the need for robust coordination mechanisms among humanitarians themselves to ensure a unified language and positions before engaging with military actors. Civil-military information and agreements should also be properly disseminated and respected within internal structures of armed actors, including at the ground level.
Policies and guidance on establishing and implementing humanitarian arrangements in contexts of explosive weapons use, in consultation with armed forces and humanitarian actors, should be elaborated in dedicated forums. These should draw on lessons learned from other related contexts where such arrangements were established. The limits of such arrangements and a ‘do no harm’ approach in these settings should be carefully considered through strong analysis, preparation, and understanding of their potential risks. The continued applicability of international humanitarian law and the protection of civilians outside of such arrangements – often ad hoc and temporary – should be acknowledged and promoted.
Where possible in contexts of explosive weapons use in populated areas, coordinated spaces for dialogue between humanitarian and armed actors for safe humanitarian access should be fostered and strengthened, with all actors acting in good faith towards humanitarian objectives. Such dialogue and engagement are essential to open doors, build mutual trust and understanding of roles, promote principles of international humanitarian law, and foster meaningful acceptance of humanitarian activities by parties to the conflict in these contexts. The importance of trusted and efficient neutral intermediaries to facilitate and negotiate humanitarian arrangements should also be recognized by states, and their roles strengthened, including through appropriate funding and recognition. Proper and adequate funding is also needed to strengthen coordination platforms, such as Access Working Groups, United Nations Civil-Military Coordination (UN-CMCoord) or Humanitarian Coordination Teams.
Enhancing collective advocacy to preserve humanitarian space
The use of explosive weapons poses unique threats to humanitarian access and presents new challenges for humanitarian advocates seeking to improve awareness and understanding for a safer environment for health and humanitarian workers. As part of the Political Declaration, coordinated and collective advocacy efforts within the humanitarian community and across sectors should aim to present a targeted and strategic voice tailored to humanitarian needs and situations specific to the use of explosive weapons in populated areas. This should be done in relevant national, regional, and global policy processes directed toward the international community, state and non-state armed actors, and parties to conflict. As such, the issue of explosive weapons in populated areas could be explicitly included in emerging advocacy and policy efforts on the protection of humanitarian workers, including as part of the promotion of the UN Security Council’s Resolution 2730 (2024), which calls on states to uphold their obligations under international law to respect and protect humanitarian personnel. The issue could also become a collective priority for the second international follow-up conference to review the implementation of the Political Declaration, to be held in 2025 in Costa Rica.
The constant promotion, at all levels, of the core humanitarian principles of impartiality, neutrality, and independence remains crucial in contexts of explosive weapons use, where fostering acceptance between armed and humanitarian actors is a prerequisite for safer and more principled humanitarian access to affected populations. This acceptance includes the willingness of local communities, authorities, armed groups, and other stakeholders in conflict or disaster-affected areas to allow and support humanitarian organizations in carrying out their activities, which is crucial for humanitarian actors to access affected populations, deliver aid, and ensure the safety of their personnel and operations. By leveraging collective advocacy, humanitarian actors can enhance efforts to preserve and expand humanitarian space, ensuring that the unique challenges posed by the use of explosive weapons in populated areas are addressed with the urgency and specificity they require, contributing to a safer and more effective humanitarian response in contemporary conflict-affected areas.