Israel strikes crowds at food distribution sites. Russia bombs cities in the Ukraine war. Can we not hold nations to account?
A Palestinian man carries the body of his child who was killed in an Israeli military strike on Gaza, at Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, 19 June 2025. (AP Photo/Jehad Alshrafi)
Editor’s note: In an interview with a Dutch newspaper 22 June 2025, Sigrid Agnes Maria Kaag, the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, announced she was resigning her position out of hopelessness that progress on peace could be made.
In the 19 months since Israel launched its first attacks on Gaza in retaliation for the 7 October 2023 massacre by Hamas on an Israeli music festival, at least 184 journalists have been killed covering the war, including 176 Palestinians. Israel has blocked foreign journalists from entering Gaza. The European Union is considering backing out of a trade agreement with Israel because a review has found that Israel’s flaunting of human rights in Gaza violates terms of the agreement.
Meanwhile in Ukraine, more than 850 civilians have been killed by Russian missiles this year and more than 4,200 injured — a 50% increase from the same period in 2024.
To help put into context the concept of human rights in wartime, we decided to republish an article by correspondent Daniel Warner, originally published September 2024, that considers the history of the Geneva Conventions and what happens when nations ignore or reject them. We launched Decoder Replay to help readers better understand current world events by seeing how our correspondents decoded similar events in the past.
This year marks the 75th anniversary of what is known as the Geneva Conventions. It forms the basis of international humanitarian law.
The four treaties and additional protocols were the realisation of a dream of five Swiss men — Henri Dunant, Louis Appia, Guillaume Henri Dufour, Gustave Moynier and Theodore Maunoir — that wars could be “civilized” by separating civilians from combatants, protecting schools and hospitals and treating prisoners of war humanely.
The international treaties were ratified by 196 countries, all UN member states and two observers (Vatican City and what became the state of Israel). And now?
“International humanitarian law is probably violated every day in the world,” said Mirjana Spoljaric Egger, the president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, on a local Geneva broadcast recently.
Punishing violators of international law
Can we reconcile the universal, formal acceptance of international humanitarian law with the way countries seem to systematically violate it?
Institutions exist that can punish violations of international humanitarian law. There is the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court, for example, yet daily violations go unpunished in Ukraine, Gaza and the West Bank, Yemen, Sudan and elsewhere.
Cordula Droege, chief legal officer of the International Committee of the Red Cross, wrote 2 September of her concern that in having signed the Geneva Conventions violators assume the appearance of virtue.
“Seventy-five years after the creation of the Geneva Conventions, armed conflict today and the rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) that govern it risk becoming an alternative moral and ethical landscape, a space in which countries consider themselves free to apply an extraordinary degree of military force while being able to maintain the stance and veneer of law-abiding actors,” Droege wrote.
She added that violators seem to be turning the original purpose of the Geneva Conventions on its head. “Instead of being interpreted to protect civilians, they are invoked to justify a level of death, injury and destruction that IHL was created to avoid,” Droege wrote.
Glossary of terms
Non-state actor: Groups or organizations that have significant power over governments but are not affiliated or funded by any government. They could be corporations or paramilitary groups, terrorist organizations, NGOs or financial groups.
Geneva Conventions: A set of treaties and additional protocols that set limits on what warring parties can do. Signatories to the Geneva Conventions pledge to protect civilians and treat prisoners of war humanely, for example.
Deterrence: When an action by one country will result in punishment that outweighs any gain made by the action. It serves to discourage such things as attacks or invasions by one country against another.
UN Security Council: The governing board of the United Nations that has the power to establish peacekeeping operations and order international sanctions. There are 15 member nations that include five permanent members: China, France, Russia, United Kingdom and the United States. Each member has the power to veto any action of the body.
Celebrating the Geneva Conventions
The celebrations of the 75th anniversary reflected this “alternative moral and ethical landscape.” The 15 member states of the United Nations Security Council were invited to a celebration in Geneva in August.
Only the Russian Federation failed to send a representative. Ever since March 2023, when Switzerland resumed European sanctions, Russia has considered it an “unfriendly” nation. Russia’s absence and increased violations around the world seemed to put a damper on the celebrations.
The increased violations has some scholars questioning the effectiveness of international humanitarian law. Samuel Moyn, professor of law and history at Yale University argues that even conceiving of the possibility of a humane war increases the possibilities that countries will go to war.
An absence of international humanitarian law could be a deterrent to war, Moyn suggests. Countries might hesitate before entering into armed conflict if it would result in uninhibited violence. Harvard Law School Professor David Kennedy angered Red Cross delegates in Geneva years ago when he made a similar argument.
Questioning international humanitarian law, like criticising human rights, goes against deep-seated liberal values. As the Red Cross motto for the 75th anniversary states, international humanitarian law is, “The one set of rules we all agree on.”
The continued relevance of international humanitarian law
Professor Andrew Clapham of Geneva’s Graduate Institute argues that international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions still play an important role. Clapham believes that the ability of the International Courts of Justice and International Criminal Court to hold violators accountable acts as a curb.
“The fact of talking about violations must give people pause for thought, including leading to examples of rises in compliance,” he wrote.
A simple example would be limitations on the ability of leaders, such as Russian President Vladmir Putin, to travel to countries where they might be arrested or prosecuted, as part of that country’s obligations under the Geneva Conventions. Clapham argues that some actors change their behaviour in order to avoid getting caught in this net.
In a speech to the members of the UN Security Council at the August celebrations, Clapham reminded them that the Geneva Conventions obligates them to do more to thwart war. “Each and every state that allows the transfer of arms is obliged to avoid contributing to or facilitating violations of the Geneva Conventions,” he said.
The Geneva Conventions, moreover, have led to other efforts to promote human rights during warfare. Back in 1998, my wife, Elisabeth Decrey Warner founded Geneva Call, an NGO that seeks to protect civilians in armed conflict. It has worked with other groups, such as Fight for Humanity to get armed non-state actors to agree to humanitarian protocols.
Although only nation states can sign the treaties it is in the interest of all parties, they argue, to respect the basic rules of the Conventions.
Bringing more parties into international agreements
Geneva Call originated revolutionary Deeds of Commitment which leaders of non-state actors could sign to demonstrate they would respect certain aspects of international humanitarian law, such as preventing starvation during armed conflicts. Non-state actors are important groups or organizations that participate in international affairs.
They may be in the private sector like Nestlé or Goldman Sachs, or public organizations like Doctors Without Borders or Human Rights Watch. Armed non-state actors include groups that are considered terrorist organizations, such as ISIS, Al Qaeda or Colombian guerillas. Numerous groups have signed the Deeds and generally followed their provisions, even beyond what they might be legally bound to do.
There is much talk in the United States today that no one is above the law. States, like individuals, should not be above the law.
Back in 1949, 196 countries voluntarily ratified the Geneva Conventions. But not all states are fulfilling their obligations. The ambivalent 75th anniversary of the Conventions highlights the current softness of international law as well as the general decline of the influence of the United Nations and the role of multilateralism — when multiple nations agree to pursue a common goal.
“The one set of rules we all agree on” has been fractured. What can we all agree on now? Targeting civilians, denying them life’s necessities, torturing innocents should be high on every state’s agenda.
The Geneva Conventions are a set of rules. Beyond those rules are basic values that all governments should respect. They are essential to our common humanity. The 75th anniversary of the Conventions, however muted, should serve as a reminder of that commonality.
A version of this story previously appeared in Counterpunch.
Three questions to consider:
1. What are the Geneva Conventions?
2. What are two international institutions that can prosecute violations of the Geneva Conventions?
3. How can treaties on human rights still have power when countries violate them?
Daniel Warner earned a PhD in Political Science from the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, where he was Deputy to the Director for many years as well as founder and director of several programs focusing on international organizations. He has lectured and taught internationally and is a frequent contributor to international media. He has served as an advisor to the UNHCR, ILO and NATO, and has been a consultant to the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense of Switzerland as well as in the private sector.