There is much talk today of new conflicts. This expression covers different types of armed conflict: those known as anarchic conflicts and others in which group identity becomes the focal point. These terms are used fairly loosely.
"Anarchic" conflicts, the upsurge of which doubtless results from the end of the Cold War, are often marked by the partial, and sometimes even total, weakening or breakdown of State structures. In such situations, armed groups take advantage of the political vacuum in an attempt to grab power. This type of conflict is, however, marked above all by a weakening or breakdown in the chain of command within the same armed groups.
Conflicts aimed at asserting group identity often seek to exclude the adversary through "ethnic cleansing". This consists in forcibly displacing or even exterminating populations. Under the effect of spiralling propaganda, violence and hatred, this type of conflict strengthens group feeling to the detriment of the existing national identity, ruling out any possibility of coexistence with other groups.
International humanitarian law still applies in these "anarchic" and "identity-related" conflicts, in which the civilian population in particular is exposed to violence. Common Article 3 requires all armed groups, whether in rebellion or not, to respect individuals who have laid down their arms and those, such as civilians, who do not take part in the hostilities.
Consequently, it is not because a States structures have been weakened or are nonexistent that there is a legal vacuum with regard to international law. On the contrary, these are precisely the circumstances in which humanitarian law comes fully into its own.
Admittedly, the humanitarian rules are harder to apply in these types of conflict. The lack of discipline among belligerents, the arming of the civilian population as weapons flood the territory and the increasingly blurred distinction between fighters and civilians often cause confrontations to take an extremely brutal turn, in which there is little place for the rules of law.
As a result, this is the type of situation in which particular efforts are needed to make people aware of humanitarian law. Better knowledge of the rules of law will not solve the underlying problem which led to the conflict, but it is likely to attenuate its deadlier consequences.
Common Article 3: a treaty in miniature
In the case of armed conflicts not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
1)Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and any place whatsoever with respect to the abovementioned persons:
- violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
- taking of hostages;
- outrages against personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
- the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
2)The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.
The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.
The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.
