Despite the enormous growth in opportunities for interaction between militaries and humanitarians there is only a very limited literature on their interaction over protection issues and evaluations of the emerging doctrines. Consequently this article charts the growth in military policies towards POC in the UN, UK, NATO and a range of other states as well as drawing attention to the challenges that still remain in operationalising responses.
Whilst the protection of civilians (POC) in conflict has been a recurring feature of the humanitarian discourse, the same has not been true in military doctrines, where the protection of civilians has long been cast in terms of arms bearers upholding their responsibilities under international humanitarian law (IHL).
However, opportunities for and pressures on military actors to develop more specific capacities and approaches in this field have grown: partly as a response to the changing nature, location and scope of conflict, particularly the increasing proportion of internal conflicts fought by irregular armed groups in urban environments. It is also a response to the scale and complexity of protection challenges in the Balkans, Rwanda, Darfur and Libya – each of which has clearly demonstrated that threats to civilians are complex and dynamic and that no single international actor is capable of mitigating them without significant support from other institutions.
The slow evolution of civilian protection as a shared objective between international military and peacekeeping forces and humanitarian actors presents both opportunities and challenges. The challenges include:
- Developing synergies to reduce civilian suffering in situations of armed conflict whilst also limiting the potentially harmful consequences of full integration. This presents real dilemmas for humanitarian organisations seeking also to maintain perceptions of neutrality and impartiality.
- Converting civilian protection from a low-priority objective to an operational-level priority, and making it a more central component of doctrine. NATO and NATO member states have been slow to produce doctrines that operationalises the concept, although fragments of a viable approach, combining restrictions on arms bearers and support to the civilian population, could be fashioned into a viable operational concept.
