View previous stories
	Autonomous weapons systems that require no meaningful human control should be prohibited by Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, agencies   Mar. 2019   Autonomous weapons that kill must be banned, insists UN chief. (UN News)   UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has called on artificial intelligence (AI) experts meeting in Geneva on Monday to push ahead with their work to restrict the development of lethal autonomous weapons systems, or LAWS, as they are also known.   In a message to the Group of Governmental Experts, the UN chief said that 'machines with the power and discretion to take lives without human involvement are politically unacceptable, morally repugnant and should be prohibited by international law'.   'No country or armed force is in favour of such 'fully autonomous' weapon systems that can take human life', Mr Guterres insisted, before welcoming the panel's statement last year that 'human responsibility for decisions on the use of weapons systems must be retained, since accountability cannot be transferred to machines'.   Although this 2018 announcement was an 'important line in the sand' by the Group of Governmental Experts - which meets under the auspices of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), the UN chief noted in his statement that while some Member States believe new legislation is required, while others would prefer less stringent political measures and guidelines that could be agreed on.   Nonetheless, it is time for the panel 'to deliver' on LAWS, the UN chief said, adding that 'it is your task now to narrow these differences and find the most effective way forward.. The world is watching, the clock is ticking and others are less sanguine. I hope you prove them wrong'.   The LAWS meeting is one of two planned for this year, which follow earlier Governmental Expert meetings in 2017 and 2018 at the UN in Geneva.   The Group's agenda covers technical issues related to the use of lethal autonomous weapons systems, including the challenges the technology poses to international humanitarian law, as well as human interaction in the development, deployment and use of emerging tech in LAWS.   In addition to the Governmental Experts, participation is expected from a wide array of international organizations, civil society, academia, and industry.   The CCW's full name is the 1980 Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, entered into force on 2 December 1983.   The Convention currently has 125 States Parties. Its purpose is to prohibit or restrict the use of specific types of weapons that are considered to cause unnecessary or unjustifiable suffering to combatants or to affect civilians indiscriminately. http://bit.ly/2TxM5RB   Mar. 2019   Resistance to killer robots growing. (DW)   Activists from 35 countries met in Berlin this week to call for a ban on lethal autonomous weapons, ahead of new talks on such weapons in Geneva. They say that if Germany took the lead, other countries would follow.   "I can build you a killer robot in just two weeks," says Noel Sharkey as he leans forward with a warning gaze. The white-haired English professor is a renowned specialist for robotics and artificial intelligence (AI). He was in Berlin to participate in an international meeting of the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots that ended on Friday.   Sharkey objects to talking about "lethal autonomous weapons systems" (LAWs) as if they were something out a science-fiction novel. Fully autonomous weapons systems are in fact a well-established reality, he says, adding that there is no need to argue about the definition thereof: These are weapons that seek, select and attack targets on their own.   That is also how the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) defines them. Soldiers no longer push the firing button with such weapons; instead, the weapons themselves use built-in software to find and strike targets. Such weapons can come in the form of missiles, unmanned ground vehicles, submarines, or swarms of mini-drones.   The reality of fully automated autonomous weapons systems was on full display this February at IDEX in Abu Dhabi, the largest arms fair in the Middle East, where German arms manufacturers also enthusiastically hawked their new weapons with autonomous functions.   Violation of international law   The ICRC says that the use of such weapons is a clear breach of international law. "We all know that a machine is incapable of making moral decisions," emphasizes Sharkey, one of the leading figures in the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots.   He notes that a machine cannot differentiate between combatants and civilians as stipulated by international law, referring to failed attempts at facial recognition in which innocent civilians were identified as supposed criminals.   Facial recognition depends on artificial intelligence (AI) to autonomously find a person of interest. Once the machine has identified that person, it can attack on its own. A growing number of critics are horrified by such a scenario.   Meanwhile, some 100 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have joined the global Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. At their Berlin meeting, those groups called on Germany to demand that autonomous weapons systems that violate international law be banned. The current German government affirmed such intentions in its coalition negotiations in 2018. Nevertheless, it has meekly pushed only for non-binding political declarations at the UN in Geneva.   "That isn't enough to establish a ban," says Thomas Kachenmeister of the NGO Facing Finance. He says the German government should join the 28 countries currently pushing for a ban on lethal autonomous weapons systems.   UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and the European Parliament are also in favor of a ban. Recently, the German Informatics Society (GI), an organization of computer researchers, as well as the influential Federal Association of German Industry (BDI), also called for a legally binding ban on LAWs.   Although countries such as the USA and China are leading the world in AI use, much of the research that such systems depend on comes from Europe. That lends great weight to European voices in the ongoing debate.   Noel Sharkey is convinced: "If Germany takes the lead, others will follow." Sharkey also warns that non-binding political declarations, like those the German government is currently championing, provide "perfect cover" for countries opposed to a ban. Such countries include Russia, Israel and the USA.   The German government has argued that it is essentially in favor of a ban, but that it has pushed the notably weaker political declaration for tactical reasons. The logic behind that approach is that it allows Germany to maintain a dialogue with countries such as the USA, rather than alienating them altogether.   Nobel Peace Laureate Jody Williams is wholly unconvinced by that argument, called on German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas to reconsider his position. Williams argued that anyone waiting for the USA to come out in favor of a ban will be waiting forever.   International talks on how to regulate LAWs will be held in Geneva, Switzerland, from March 25 to March 29.   Jan. 2019   Public opposition to killer robots grows while states continue to drag their feet.   More than three in five people across 26 countries oppose the development of autonomous weapons that could select and kill targets without human intervention, according to a new poll commissioned by the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots.   The poll, which was carried out by Ipsos MORI, found that:   In the 26 countries surveyed in 2018, more than three in every five people (61%) oppose the development of lethal autonomous weapons systems.   Two-thirds (66%) of those opposed to lethal autonomous weapons systems were most concerned that they would 'cross a moral line because machines should not be allowed to kill'.   More than half (54%) of those who opposed said they were concerned that the weapons would be 'unaccountable'.   A near-identical survey in 23 countries in January 2017 found that 56% of respondents were opposed to lethal autonomous weapons systems.   More than half of respondents opposed killer robots in China (60%); Russia (59%); the UK (54%); France (59%), and the USA (52%).   The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots is a growing global coalition of NGOs, including Amnesty International, that is working to ban fully autonomous weapons.   'This poll shows that the states blocking a ban on killer robots are totally out of step with public opinion. Governments should be protecting people from the myriad risks that killer robots pose, not rushing into a new arms race which could have terrifying consequences', said Rasha Abdul Rahim, Acting Deputy Director of Amnesty Tech.   'We still have time to halt the development and proliferation of fully autonomous weapons, but we won't have that luxury for long. Governments should take note of this poll and urgently begin negotiating a new treaty to prohibit these horrifying weapons. Only this can help ensure respect for international law and address ethical and security concerns regarding delegating the power to make life-and-death decisions to machines'.   Amnesty International is calling for a total ban on the development, production and use of fully autonomous weapon systems, in light of the serious human rights, humanitarian and security risks they pose. The use of autonomous weapons without meaningful and effective human control would undermine the right to life and other human rights and create an accountability gap if, once deployed, they are able to make their own determinations about the use of lethal force.   However, a minority of states at the 2018 November annual meeting of the Convention on Conventional Weapons, used consensus rules to thwart meaningful diplomatic progress. Russia, Israel, South Korea, and the USA indicated at the meeting that they would not support negotiations for a new treaty, but the poll results show that more than half of respondents in Russia (59%) and the USA (52%) oppose autonomous weapons.   More than half of respondents opposed autonomous weapons in China (60%), South Korea (74%) and the UK (54%), which are among the leading states developing this technology.   Nov. 2018   Autonomous weapons: States must agree on what human control means in practice. (ICRC)   Should a weapon system be able to make its own 'decision' about who to kill?   The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) believes that the answer is no, and today is calling on States to agree to strong, practical and future-proof limits on autonomy in weapon systems.   During the annual meeting of the States party to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons in Geneva November 21-23, the ICRC will urge that the new mandate of the Group of Governmental Experts focuses on determining the type and degree of human control that would be necessary to comply with international humanitarian law and satisfy ethical concerns. Several questions need to be answered:   What is the level of human supervision, including the ability to intervene and deactivate, that would be required during the operation of a weapon that can autonomously select and attack targets? What is the level of predictability and reliability that would be required, also taking into account the weapon's tasks and the environment of use?   What other operational constraints would be required, notably on the weapon system's tasks, its targets, the environment in which it operates (e.g. populated or unpopulated area), the duration of its operation, and the scope of its movement?   "It is now widely accepted that human control must be maintained over weapon systems and the use of force, which means we need limits on autonomy," said ICRC President Peter Maurer. 'Now is the moment for States to determine the level of human control that is needed to satisfy ethical and legal considerations.   Only humans can make context-specific judgements of distinction, proportionality and precautions in combat. Only humans can behave ethically, uphold moral responsibility and show mercy and compassion. Machines cannot exercise the complex and uniquely human judgements required on battlefields in order to comply with international humanitarian law. As inanimate objects, they will never be capable of embodying human conscience or ethical values'.   Given militaries significant interest in increasingly autonomous weapons, there is a growing risk that humans will become so far removed from the choice to use force that life-and-death decision-making will effectively be left to sensors and software.   'Humans cannot delegate the decision to use force and violence to machines. Decisions to kill, injure and destroy must remain with humans. It is humans who apply the law and are obliged to respect it', said Kathleen Lawand, the head of the ICRC's arms unit.   http://www.icrc.org/en/document/autonomous-weapons-states-must-agree-what-human-control-means-practice   Aug. 2018   Basic humanity and the public conscience support a ban on fully autonomous weapons, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Countries participating in an upcoming international meeting on such 'killer robots' should agree to negotiate a prohibition on the weapons systems development, production, and use.   The 46-page report, Heed the Call: A Moral and Legal Imperative to Ban Killer Robots, finds that fully autonomous weapons would violate what is known as the Martens Clause. This long-standing provision of international humanitarian law requires emerging technologies to be judged by the 'principles of humanity' and the 'dictates of public conscience' when they are not already covered by other treaty provisions.   'Permitting the development and use of killer robots would undermine established moral and legal standards', said Bonnie Docherty, senior arms researcher at Human Rights Watch, which coordinates the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. 'Countries should work together to preemptively ban these weapons systems before they proliferate around the world'.   The 1995 preemptive ban on blinding lasers, which was motivated in large part by concerns under the Martens Clause, provides precedent for prohibiting fully autonomous weapons as they come closer to becoming reality.   The report was co-published with the Harvard Law School International Human Rights Clinic, for which Docherty is associate director of armed conflict and civilian protection.   More than 70 governments will convene at the United Nations in Geneva from August 27 to 31, 2018, for their sixth meeting since 2014 on the challenges raised by fully autonomous weapons, also called lethal autonomous weapons systems. The talks under the Convention on Conventional Weapons, a major disarmament treaty, were formalized in 2017, but they are not yet directed toward a specific goal.   Human Rights Watch and the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots urge states party to the convention to agree to begin negotiations in 2019 for a new treaty that would require meaningful human control over weapons systems and the use of force. Fully autonomous weapons would select and engage targets without meaningful human control.   To date, 26 countries have explicitly supported a prohibition on fully autonomous weapons. Thousands of scientists and artificial intelligence experts, more than 20 Nobel Peace Laureates, and more than 160 religious leaders and organizations of various denominations have also demanded a ban. In June, Google released a set of ethical principles that includes a pledge not to develop artificial intelligence for use in weapons.   At the Convention on Conventional Weapons meetings, almost all countries have called for retaining some form of human control over the use of force. The emerging consensus for preserving meaningful human control, which is effectively equivalent to a ban on weapons that lack such control, reflects the widespread opposition to fully autonomous weapons.   Human Rights Watch and the Harvard clinic assessed fully autonomous weapons under the core elements of the Martens Clause. The clause, which appears in the Geneva Conventions and is referenced by several disarmament treaties, is triggered by the absence of specific international treaty provisions on a topic. It sets a moral baseline for judging emerging weapons.   The groups found that fully autonomous weapons would undermine the principles of humanity, because they would be unable to apply either compassion or nuanced legal and ethical judgment to decisions to use lethal force. Without these human qualities, the weapons would face significant obstacles in ensuring the humane treatment of others and showing respect for human life and dignity.   Fully autonomous weapons would also run contrary to the dictates of public conscience. Governments, experts, and the broader public have widely condemned the loss of human control over the use of force.   Partial measures, such as regulations or political declarations short of a legally binding prohibition, would fail to eliminate the many dangers posed by fully autonomous weapons. In addition to violating the Martens Clause, the weapons raise other legal, accountability, security, and technological concerns.   In previous publications, Human Rights Watch and the Harvard clinic have elaborated on the challenges that fully autonomous weapons would present for compliance with international humanitarian law and international human rights law, analyzed the gap in accountability for the unlawful harm caused by such weapons, and responded to critics of a preemptive ban.   The 26 countries that have called for the ban are: Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China (use only), Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Ghana, Guatemala, the Holy See, Iraq, Mexico, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, the State of Palestine, Uganda, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.   The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, which began in 2013, is a coalition of 75 nongovernmental organizations in 32 countries that is working to preemptively ban the development, production, and use of fully autonomous weapons. Docherty will present the report at a Campaign to Stop Killer Robots briefing for CCW delegates scheduled on August 28 at the United Nations in Geneva.   'The groundswell of opposition among scientists, faith leaders, tech companies, nongovernmental groups, and ordinary citizens shows that the public understands that killer robots cross a moral threshold', Docherty said. 'Their concerns, shared by many governments, deserve an immediate response'.   Apr. 2018   April 2018 marks five years since the launch of Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. It is also the fifth time since 2014 that governments are convening at the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) in Geneva to discuss concerns over lethal autonomous weapons systems, also known as fully autonomous weapons or 'killer robots'.   The campaign urges states to participate in the CCW Group of Governmental Experts meeting, which opens at the United Nations (UN) on Monday, 9 April, and to commit to retain meaningful human control of weapons systems and over individual attacks.   Why the concern about killer robots?   Armed drones and other autonomous weapons systems with decreasing levels of human control are currently in use and development by high-tech militaries including the US, China, Israel, South Korea, Russia, and the UK. The concern is that a variety of available sensors and advances in artificial intelligence are making it increasingly practical to design weapons systems that would target and attack without any meaningful human control.   If the trend towards autonomy continues, humans may start to fade out of the decision-making loop for certain military actions, perhaps retaining only a limited oversight role, or simply setting broad mission parameters.   Several states, the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots, artificial intelligence experts, faith leaders, and Nobel Peace Laureates, among others, fundamentally object to permitting machines to determine who or what to target on the battlefield or in policing, border control, and other circumstances. Such a far-reaching development raises an array of profound ethical, human rights, legal, operational, proliferation, technical, and other concerns.   While the capabilities of future technology are uncertain, there are strong reasons to believe that devolving more decision making over targeting to weapons systems themselves will erode the fundamental obligation that rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law be applied by people, and with sufficient specificity to make them meaningful.   Furthermore, with an erosion of human responsibility to apply legal rules at an appropriate level of detail there will likely come an erosion of human accountability for the specific outcomes of such attacks. Taken together, such developments would produce a stark dehumanization of military or policing processes.   What is a 'killer robot'?   A weapons system that identifies, selects and employs force against targets without meaningful human control should be considered a lethal autonomous weapons system. It would have no human in the decision-making loop when the system selects and engages the target of an attack. Applying human control only as a function of design and in an initial deployment stage would fail to fulfill the IHL obligations that apply to commanders in relation to each attack.   Why the need for human control?   Sufficient human control over the use of weapons, and of their effects, is essential to ensuring that the use of a weapon is morally justifiable and can be legal. Such control is also required as a basis for accountability over the consequences of the use of force. To demonstrate that such control can be exercised, states must show that they understand the process by which specific systems identify individual target objects and understand the context, in space and time, where the application of force may take place.   Given the development of greater autonomy in weapon systems, states should make it explicit that meaningful human control is required over individual attacks and that weapon systems that operate without meaningful human control should be prohibited. For human control to be meaningful, the technology must be predictable, the user must have relevant information, and there must be the potential for timely human judgement and intervention.   States should come prepared to the CCW meeting provide their views on the key 'touchpoints' of human/machine interaction in weapons systems. These include design aspects, such as how certain features may be encoded as target objects; how the area or boundary of operation may be fixed; the time period over which a system may operate; and, any possibility of human intervention to terminate the operation and recall the weapon system.   Based on these touchpoints, states should be prepared to explain how control is applied over existing weapons systems, especially those with certain autonomous or automatic functions.   What does the Human Rights Council say about killer robots?   The first multilateral debate on killer robots took place at the Human Rights Council in May 2013, but states have not considered this topic at the Council since then. Countries such as Austria, Brazil, Ireland, Sierra Leone, and South Africa affirm the relevance of human rights considerations and the Council in the international debate over fully autonomous weapons.   In February 2016, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association issued a report recommending that 'autonomous weapons systems that require no meaningful human control should be prohibited'.   http://www.stopkillerrobots.org/2018/03/fiveyears/ http://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/21/killer-robots-fail-key-moral-legal-test http://www.stopkillerrobots.org/2018/08/unsg/ http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/01/public-opposition-to-killer-robots-grows-while-states-continue-to-drag-their-feet/ http://www.stopkillerrobots.org/2019/01/global-poll-61-oppose-killer-robots/ http://www.politico.eu/article/killer-robots-overran-united-nations-lethal-autonomous-weapons-systems/ http://www.dw.com/en/resistance-to-killer-robots-growing/a-48040866 http://www.stopkillerrobots.org/ Visit the related web page
	Civilians are #NotATarget by OCHA, ICRC, IFRC, MSF, agencies   May 2019   Civilians continue to suffer devastating consequences in armed conflict situations   (Urgent call for action to protect civilians in conflict: - Concern Worldwide, InterAction, Amnesty International, War Child International, Norwegian Refugee Council, Watchlist on Children and Armed Conflict, CARE, Handicap International - Humanity & Inclusion, Human Rights Watch, Action Against Hunger USA, Oxfam, International Rescue Committee, Federation Internationale des Ligues des Droits de I'Homme, Save the Children, World Vision, Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, Center for Civilians in Conflict, Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack, PAX)   This year marks the 20th anniversary of the UN Security Council taking up the protection of civilians in armed conflict on its agenda, as well as two important resolutions passed in 1999: Resolution 1265 on the protection of civilians in armed conflict and Resolution 1270, which included the first explicit protection of civilians mandate for a United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operation. This year also marks the 70th anniversary of the 1949 Geneva Conventions.   We collectively urge Security Council members, the UN Secretary-General, and all UN Member States to take full advantage of the opportunity of these important anniversaries to meaningfully improve civilian protection in country-specific situations and advance an ambitious vision for the protection of civilians agenda.   There have been important strides in advancing the protection of civilians over the past twenty years, including through Security Council resolutions, the development of policy by the UN, and actions taken at the national level by governments and determined civil society actors to prioritize protection.   These developments have been buoyed by the robust framework of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL), which were developed to limit the impact of war on civilians and safeguard the security and dignity of human beings.   Yet, as we mark these important developments, civilians continue to suffer disproportionately from the devastating consequences of armed conflict.   In Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Libya, Myanmar, Nigeria, South Sudan, Syria, Yemen and far too many other conflict situations, civilians are paying the highest price for the failure of parties to armed conflict - and those Member States that support them - to abide by the norms and laws that safeguard humanity.   Civilians are routinely targeted, as are the places in which they live, work, study, worship, or seek or provide medical care or humanitarian aid.   Explosive weapons with wide-area effects are employed in populated areas, with devastating and generational consequences.   Conflict-related sexual violence and gender-based violence are occurring at shocking levels, with women and girls facing heightened risk of sexual and gender-based violence during conflict.   We are also witnessing a worrying retreat from multilateralism and the rules-based international order, which creates a permissive environment for violations and abuses against civilians in conflict zones.   The international community must collectively turn this worrying tide. We urge Security Council Members, the UN Secretary-General, and all UN Member States to take determined action to strengthen the protection of civilians and stand up for the norms and laws that are essential to safeguard civilians in conflict.   The upcoming UN Security Council Open Debate on the Protection of Civilians on May 23 is a crucial opportunity for Security Council members, the UN Secretary-General, and all UN Member States to make concrete commitments and pledges to strengthen the protection of civilians in armed conflict during the anniversary year and over the years to come. The following issues and recommendations should be the focus of collective action:   To Members of the Security Council: Use your voice and vote to prioritize the protection of civilians in the decisions and deliberations of the Council.   * Publicly recognize and affirm the protection of civilians in armed conflict as one of the core issues on the agenda of the Security Council.   Recommit to fully implementing the provisions of Council resolutions on the protection of civilians, including resolutions 1894, 2175, 2286, and 2417, as well as thematic resolutions on children and armed conflict, women, peace and security, and sexual violence in armed conflict.   Systematically call on all parties to armed conflict to take all feasible steps to ensure the protection of civilians.   Respect and ensure respect for IHL by ceasing support for parties to armed conflict where there are serious allegations or risks of violations of IHL and violations or abuses of IHRL.   * Unequivocally condemn violations of IHL and violations or abuses of IHRL by all parties to armed conflict. This should include consistently condemning direct and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, deliberate targeting of schools, hospitals and other civilian infrastructure, and arbitrary denial of humanitarian access.   Ensure that there are consequences for state and non-state actors who deliberately violate or disregard their obligations, including through accountability mechanisms.   Consistently support the creation of international, independent investigative mechanisms in situations of armed conflict where there are significant civilian casualties. Commit to make the reports of such mechanisms public to bring greater transparency to the Security Council's work in pursuit of accountability for grave violations and to deter future violations.   Encourage parties to armed conflict to decisively and transparently investigate allegations of civilian harm committed by their forces.   * Strengthen the ability of UN peacekeeping operations to protect civilians by providing political support to these missions and ensuring they have adequate resources and capabilities to match their mandates, including Protection of Civilians Advisors, civilian and uniformed Gender Advisors, Women's Protection Advisors, Child Protection Advisors, and the appropriate number of qualified human rights monitors.   Proactively assess the performance of UN peacekeeping operations in delivering on protection of civilians mandates, including specific tasks for the protection of children, women, and people with disabilities, and ensure the full and effective implementation of the provisions of Security Council Resolution 2436 (2018).   Ensure that the protection of civilians is prioritized in the context of downsizing, readjustment, or transition of peacekeeping operations.   * Support timely and decisive action aimed at preventing or ending the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes.   Publicly pledge not to vote against a credible draft resolution before the Security Council on timely and decisive action aimed at halting or preventing such crimes, in line with the Accountability Coherence and Transparency Group's Code of Conduct (A/70/621, 2015).   * Regularly convene specific briefings or informal meetings on the protection of civilians in the context of country-specific situations on the Council's agenda. Regularly invite UN officials with specific protection mandates and experts from local, national and international civil society to brief the Council on these issues, including speakers who can provide a gender and age-specific analysis.   To the UN Secretary-General: Deliver on commitments to lead a 'global effort' in support of the protection of civilians. Speak truth to power for civilians caught in conflict.   * Follow through on the commitment in your 2017 report on the protection of civilians in armed conflict to launch a 'global effort' in support of the agenda. Deliver an ambitious vision to strengthen the protection of civilians in armed conflict today and over the next twenty years. Mobilize senior UN leaders and the agencies, offices, and departments of the UN behind this effort.   * Demand an end to attacks against civilians and strongly and publicly condemn violations of IHL and violations and abuses of IHRL by all parties to armed conflict. Press parties to armed conflict to transparently investigate and thoroughly report on allegations of civilian harm.   Spare no effort in promoting accountability for violations of IHL and violations and abuses of IHRL through national, regional, ad hoc, and international judicial mechanisms, including the International Criminal Court.   * Speak out forcefully against conflict-related sexual violence, gender-based violence, disability-based violence, and all grave violations of children's rights in armed conflict.   Fully exercise your authority in listing in your reports all parties to armed conflicts found responsible for perpetrating conflict-related sexual violence and any of the six grave violations against children in armed conflict.   Use your influence, good offices, and the development of Action Plans to ensure these parties take meaningful steps to address the reasons for their listing.   * Ensure UN peacekeeping operations fully implement their mandates to protect civilians and take a comprehensive and whole-of-mission approach to protection. Vigorously address any incidents of underperformance or failure to protect civilians, including through accountability measures.   Take steps to ensure that peacekeeping operations minimize harm to civilians, including through support to national security forces or parallel military operations, and ensure the full implementation of the UN Human Rights Due Diligence Policy on UN Support to Non-UN Security Forces.   Ensure that UN peacekeeping operations safely and meaningfully engage local communities on their protection needs, taking care to ensure that all groups, including women, youth, children, and people living with disabilities, are proactively engaged so that their perspectives and capacities shape mission efforts to respond to protection threats.   * Establish a system-wide approach to record civilian harm and ensure that UN peacekeeping operations, special political missions, and other relevant UN agencies or offices in the field have the capacity and guidance to proactively monitor, analyze trends, and publicly report on civilian harm.   Regularly share gender, disability and age- disaggregated information and analysis on protection of civilians trends with the Security Council to better inform its deliberations and decision-making.   To All UN Member States: Prioritize the protection of civilians at the national level, share and systematize good practices, and ensure full compliance with IHL and IHRL.   * Re-state your full commitment to upholding obligations under the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, as well as all relevant IHRL conventions. Accede to and implement any outstanding relevant treaties and conventions, including Additional Protocol I and II to the Geneva Conventions and the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (OPAC).   Publicly commit to prioritize the protection of civilians at the national level, including through the adoption and implementation of a national policy framework on the protection of civilians, and the establishment of specific policies and mechanisms to mitigate harm to civilians and respond to civilian harm.   Further commit to the systematic collection of information and disaggregated data regarding civilian harm, and accept and encourage information from civil society regarding threats to civilians and civilian harm incidents. Fully promote and ensure accountability and transparency for violations of IHL and IHRL.   * Adopt and implement key policies and political declarations related to the protection of civilians agenda, including: developing, implementing and financing National Action Plans on Women, Peace and Security, and endorsing and implementing the Paris Principles and the Safe Schools Declaration.   * Support efforts towards the adoption of a multilateral political declaration on explosive weapons in populated areas during the 20th anniversary year.   Such a declaration should commit states to avoid the use of explosive weapons with wide-area effects in populated areas given their devastating humanitarian impact on individuals and communities, including deaths, injuries and damage to vital civilian infrastructure, and the high likelihood of indiscriminate effects.   Commit to develop strong national standards and restrictions on the use of explosive weapons with wide-area effects in populated areas.   Review and strengthen policies and practices with a view to avoiding the use of explosive weapons in populated areas.   Gather and make available relevant data, including through civilian harm tracking and civilian casualty recording processes. Contribute to assisting victims and their communities in addressing civilian harm from the effects of explosive weapons.   * Publicly recognize that the protection of civilians must be a priority objective in any security partnership and share best practices that would enable improvements in the protection of civilians by partner security forces. Clearly identify conditions regarding the protection of civilians that would trigger downgrading or termination of security partnerships.   Strictly comply with the Arms Trade Treaty, which can help protect civilians in even the most difficult situations by placing IHL and IHRL at the center of decisions on whether or not to transfer arms.   * Reaffirm the core humanitarian principles, including that of impartiality which makes no distinction in the protection of rights of those at risk on the basis of nationality, race, gender, religious belief, class or political opinions, and states that humanitarian action should be independent and free from political influence.   Recommit to facilitating timely and safe access to humanitarian assistance and protection to affected civilians, without any obstacles created by disproportionate military tactics or unreasonable bureaucratic impediments. Include humanitarian exemptions in any counter-terrorism legislation and policies to prevent unintended consequences or restrictions on humanitarian assistance.   Explicitly condemn instances of killings and attacks on humanitarian and medical workers and ensure accountability for such attacks.   * Publicly recognize the importance of UN peacekeeping operations fully delivering on mandates to protect civilians.   Take steps to implement the provisions of the Declaration of Shared Commitments on UN Peacekeeping Operations, particularly those commitments on strengthening the protection of civilians, improving performance and accountability, and sustaining peace, in order to ensure that momentum behind peacekeeping reform is maintained.   Endorse and implement the Kigali Principles on the Protection of Civilians and the Vancouver Principles on Peacekeeping and the Prevention of the Recruitment and Use of Child Soldiers. http://bit.ly/2Lvqx9z   Aug. 2018   Civilians are #NotATarget!   Every year World Humanitarian Day brings citizens of the world together to rally support for people living in humanitarian crises and to pay tribute to the aid workers who help them. This year, World Humanitarian Day builds on the momentum created by the 2017 #NotATarget campaign, which saw more than 2 million people take actions urging global leaders to do a better job of protecting civilians, humanitarians and health workers in conflict zones.   Civilians in conflict zones are routinely killed or maimed in targeted or indiscriminate attacks. Last year, the United Nations recorded the deaths or injuries of tens of thousands of civilians in attacks in just six conflict-affected countries: Afghanistan, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Iraq, Somalia and Yemen.   The failure of parties to conflict to protect civilians cannot go unchallenged. Around the world, conflict is exacting a massive toll on people's lives. People in cities and towns struggle to find food, water and safe shelter, while fighting drives millions of people from their homes.   Children are recruited by armed groups and used to fight, and their schools are destroyed. Women are abused and humiliated.   As humanitarian workers deliver aid and medical workers treat the sick and wounded, they are directly targeted, treated as threats, and prevented from bringing relief and care to those in desperate need.   Conflict has forced record numbers of people to flee their homes, with over 65 million people now displaced, most of them within their own borders.   Humanitarians and health workers are frequently targeted in attacks and prevented from carrying out impartial humanitarian or medical activities. Since 2003, over 4,000 humanitarians have been killed, injured, detained, kidnapped and prevented from responding to those in need. That is an average of 300 cases a year. In 2017, WHO recorded 322 attacks across conflict-affected countries including Afghanistan, CAR, DRC, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Nigeria, Somalis, South Sudan, Sudan and Syria. These resulted in 242 deaths of and 229 injuries to medical personnel and patients.   There are rules governing fighters behaviour in war. Every time those rules are broken, human suffering intensifies. States and armed groups have clear and long established international legal obligations in conflict, including to protect civilians from harm, to spare schools and hospitals, and to ensure the safe and unimpeded passage of aid workers and supplies. Leaders and fighting forces must take active steps to spare civilians and the infrastructure they rely on.   Conflict increasingly takes place in towns and cities, injuring tens of thousands of civilians every year and laying waste to homes and vital infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, and water and power systems. More than 50 million people are currently affected by conflict in urban areas. Our global capacity to respond to these crises is increasingly overstretched.   Conflict-driven food insecurity and the potential for famine have left millions of lives hanging in the balance. Conflict is one of the main drivers of global food insecurity, in addition to climatic shock.   World leaders must ensure violators are held accountable. In his report this year on the Protection of Civilians in conflict, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called on countries to undertake credible and effective investigations into allegations of serious violations of international humanitarian law and to hold perpetrators to account, with the support of the United Nations as necessary.   At the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016, global leaders made commitments to uphold the norms that safeguard humanity - to undertake actions to protect civilians and civilian infrastructure in armed conflict.   This year once again, millions of citizens from around the world are demanding that world leaders and non-state actors take action to protect people caught in armed conflict.   We demand that world leaders do everything in their power to protect civilians in conflict. Civilians are #NotATarget   June 2018   We are seeing an utter disregard for the protection of children in conflict - UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta Fore.   'I have recently returned from a trip to Mali with the Secretary General, where children are suffering in silence, and are the missing face of the crisis.   More than 850,000 children under the age of five are at risk of malnutrition this year, including 274,000 who face severe malnutrition and are at imminent risk of death. This represents a 34 per cent increase over our initial estimates for the year.   More than a million children are out of primary school and another million are out of secondary school. At least 750 primary schools remain closed in the northern and central parts of the country due to insecurity.   Mali is also one of the top 10 countries in the world with the highest rates of newborn and maternal mortality, with 1 in 28 babies dying in the first month of life and 1 in 27 women likely to die from pregnancy-related causes.   Mali is one of many countries around the world where children are suffering greatly because of conflict.   Yemen has the highest number of children in need at 11.3 million, followed by Syria with 8 million children and the Democratic Republic of the Congo with 7.9 million.   These are vast numbers, and the number of children affected by conflict is on the increase. It's an issue that UNICEF is hard at work on, and we very much appreciate Sweden's long standing interest and leadership on the issue of children and armed conflict. It is an issue the world needs to pay more attention to. Children are bearing the brunt of most of these conflicts.   What we are seeing around the world is an utter disregard for the protection of children.   In Syria, over 300 education facilities have been attacked since the beginning of the conflict 7 years ago. Schools should always a be a place of safety. Schools should always be protected.   In South Sudan, around 19,000 children continue to serve as fighters, messengers, porters, cooks and even sex slaves for the warring parties.   Conflicts are increasingly taking place in urban settings, causing significant damage to civilian infrastructure and damaging social protection systems.   Water systems are being damaged: In Yemen, between August 2017 and May 2018, there were 5 verified attacks by the Coalition forces on water reservoirs and pipes, namely in Sa'ada and Amran governorates, affecting over 90,000 people.   Hospitals and medical staff have frequently come under direct attack. In Syria alone, 92 attacks have been documented over the first four months of this year, involving 89 deaths and 135 injuries. In 2017, the World Health Organization recorded 322 attacks resulting in 242 deaths among medical personnel and patients.   Hard won gains on education are being reversed. In Mali, the number of children out of primary school increased by 30 per cent since 2009. In Afghanistan, the number of children out of school increased for the first time since 2002, with 3.7 million children - nearly half of all children between ages 7 and 17 - now missing out on school.   Harrowing violence inflicted on women and girls, often with life-long consequences and in complete impunity.   In Cox's Bazar, nine months after Rohingya refugees fled brutal attacks that included killings, burnings and rapes - women are facing the stigma of sexual violence and the horror of delivering and raising babies in appalling conditions.   The longer the conflict, the deeper the impact.. We see this in the long unresolved conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, from the hundreds of Palestinian children who are detained in Israeli prisons each month, to the children in southern Israel who live under the threat of mortars or rockets landing in their homes and schools.   We also see it in the Democratic Republic of the Congo where ethnic violence in the Kasai region has led to a massive increase in child recruitment, and where decades of war have weakened health systems, making the country vulnerable to disease outbreaks. An ongoing Ebola outbreak is the latest addition to the woes of the country and its children.   In all these countries, UNICEF's dedicated teams are working to deliver for children, often in extremely complex environments and sometimes at great risk.   Examples of this work since the beginning of the year include:   In Cox's Bazar, diphtheria vaccination for more than 400,000 children and psychosocial support for 140,000 children. In South Sudan, measles vaccination for 460,000 children and release of more than 800 child soldiers. In Syria, access to safe water for 13 million people and polio vaccination for 3.3 million children. In Yemen, severe malnutrition treatment for over 61,000 children and access to safe water for close to 4 million people.   We need access to the populations we serve. We urge parties to the conflicts to allow humanitarian organizations to have unimpeded, unconditional and sustained access so that we are able to save lives.   We need funds. Of the $3.7 billion we need for humanitarian programmes this year, we have only received 900 million - or 24 per cent in 2018.   Children need peace, but meanwhile, parties to conflict have an obligation to respect the rules of war - rules that prohibit the unlawful targeting of civilians, attacks on schools or hospitals, the use, recruitment and unlawful detention of children, and the denial of humanitarian assistance. When conflicts break out, these rules need to be respected and those who break them need to be held to account'. http://uni.cf/2kOgbl1   May 2018   Attacks on children in conflict continue unabated - UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta Fore.   'From the Central African Republic to South Sudan, and from Syria to Afghanistan, attacks on children in conflict have continued unabated during the first four months of the year.   "With little remorse and even less accountability, parties to conflict continue to blatantly disregard one of the most basic rules in war: the protection of children.   "No method of warfare has been off-limits, no matter how deadly for children: Indiscriminate attacks on schools, hospitals and other civilian infrastructure, abductions, child recruitment, besiegement, abuse in detention and denial of humanitarian assistance were all too commonplace.   "In Yemen, for example, more than 220 children were allegedly killed and over 330 were injured since the beginning of the year as a result of the conflict. Nearly 4.3 million children are now at risk of starvation, a 24 per cent increase over 2017 levels. An acute watery diarrhoea and cholera outbreak which killed more than 400 children under the age of five last year is threatening to claim even more young lives as the rainy season begins and hygiene conditions deteriorate further.   "In Syria, hopes for peace remain dim. More than 70 attacks on hospitals and health facilities were verified during the first three months of the year, denying children and families vital health services. Over 300 education facilities have been attacked since the beginning of the conflict. Some 5.3 million children have been internally displaced or became refugees, and nearly 850,000 children continue to live in besieged or hard-to-reach areas.   "In Gaza, we have seen children killed and injured in protests since early March, with reports on Monday of more child casualties in what is said to be the deadliest day of violence since the 2014 Gaza war.   In Bangladesh, more than 400,000 Rohingya refugee children who survived recent atrocities in Myanmar need humanitarian assistance. As the monsoon season approaches, the risk of cholera and other waterborne diseases is higher than ever.   "In South Sudan, the first country I visited as UNICEF Executive Director, at least 2.6 million children have been forced to flee their homes. More than 1 million children are acutely malnourished including over 250,000 severely so and at increased risk of death. Although close to 600 children have been released from armed groups so far this year, around 19,000 continue to serve as fighters, messengers, porters, cooks and even sex slaves for the warring parties.   "In Afghanistan, more than 150 children were reported killed and over 400 injured during the first three months of the year because of the conflict.   "In the Central African Republic, renewed violence over the past few months has forced nearly 29,000 children to flee their homes, bringing the total number of internally displaced children close to 360,000. More than 2 in 5 children under the age of five suffer from chronic malnutrition and one third of school-aged children are now out of school.   "In all these countries and many more, committed teams from UNICEF and partners are doing all they can to alleviate the suffering of the most vulnerable, those separated from their families, terrified and alone, those getting sick in densely populated refugee camps, those on the move in monsoon and unrelenting dry seasons, those who are starving.   Despite funding shortfalls - we have only received 16 per cent of our funding needs for this year - we are resolutely committed to serving the most vulnerable. We are vaccinating children, treating them for malnutrition, sending them to school, providing them with protection services, and trying to meet their basic needs.   Humanitarian aid alone is not enough. Children need peace and protection at all times. The rules of war prohibit the unlawful targeting of civilians, attacks on schools or hospitals, the use, recruitment and unlawful detention of children, and the denial of humanitarian assistance. When conflicts break out, these rules need to be respected and those who break them need to be held to account. Enough is enough. Stop attacks on children." http://uni.cf/2GgLH3f   Feb. 2018   Humanitarian Action for Children 2018 Appeal   Around the world, violent conflict is driving humanitarian needs to critical levels, with children especially vulnerable. Conflicts that have endured for years - such as those in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Nigeria, South Sudan, Syria and Yemen, among other countries - continue to deepen in complexity, bringing new waves of violence, displacement and disruption to children's lives.   'Children cannot wait for wars to be brought to an end, with crises threatening the immediate survival and long term future of children and young people on a catastrophic scale', said UNICEF Director of Emergency Programmes, Manuel Fontaine.   'Children are the most vulnerable when conflict or disaster causes the collapse of essential services such as healthcare, water and sanitation. Unless the international community takes urgent action to protect and provide life-saving assistance to these children, they face an increasingly bleak future'.   'Parties to conflicts are showing a blatant disregard for the lives of children. Children are not only coming under direct attack, but are also being denied basic services as schools, hospitals and civilian infrastructure are damaged or destroyed. Approximately 84 per cent of the 2018 funding appeal is for work in countries affected by humanitarian crises borne of violence and conflict.   The world is becoming a more dangerous place for many children, with almost one in four children now living in a country affected by conflict or disaster. For too many of these children, daily life is a nightmare.   The spread of water-borne diseases is one of the greatest threats to children's lives in crises. Attacks on water and sanitation infrastructure, siege tactics which deny children access to safe water, as well as forced displacement into areas with no water and sanitation infrastructure - all leave children and families at risk of relying on contaminated water and unsafe sanitation.   Girls and women face additional threats, as they often fulfil the role of collecting water for their families in dangerous situations.   '117 million people living through emergencies lack access to safe water and in many countries affected by conflict, more children die from diseases caused by unclean water and poor sanitation than from direct violence', said Fontaine. 'Without access to safe water and sanitation, children fall ill, and are often unable to be treated as hospitals and health centres either do not function or are overcrowded'.   'The threat is even greater as millions of children face life-threatening levels of malnutrition, making them more susceptible to water-borne diseases like cholera, creating a vicious cycle of undernutrition and disease'.   As the leading humanitarian agency on water, sanitation and hygiene in emergencies, UNICEF provides over half of the emergency water, sanitation and hygiene services in humanitarian crises around the world. http://www.unicef.org/appeals/   http://www.worldhumanitarianday.org/en http://www.icrc.org/en/document/ihl-our-shield-against-barbarity-presidents-address-address-human-rights-council http://www.icrc.org/eng/war-and-law/protected-persons/civilians/overview-civilians-protected.htm http://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/civilians/ http://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/index/ http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/ProtectionOfCivilianPersons.aspx http://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/vwTreaties1949.xsp http://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul http://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/ http://www.globalr2p.org/ http://reliefweb.int/topics/safety-security http://watchlist.org/watchlist-news/ http://bit.ly/2O4hjNF http://peacekeeping.un.org/en http://bit.ly/2LJHe0A http://www.safeguardinghealth.org/ http://www.protectingeducation.org/ http://www.agendaforhumanity.org/cr/2 http://twitter.com/hashtag/notatarget http://twitter.com/crisis_action http://twitter.com/nrc_egeland   * Agenda for Humanity: Respect the Rules of War: http://www.agendaforhumanity.org/cr/2   * Report of the UN Secretary-General on the protection of civilians in armed conflict: http://bit.ly/2q9Dk6x   * States must act to fulfil famine victims right to food, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food: http://bit.ly/2OD2Nxt   * Monitoring food security in countries with conflict situations (FAO/WFP) Aug. 2018: http://bit.ly/2zP3kWJ http://www.fao.org/emergencies/emergency-types/conflicts/en/ Visit the related web page
	View more stories