It’s not easy. Any humanitarian worker will be able to talk about the dilemmas he faces, also with some frequency, when making decisions that will affect the lives of the victims. It is difficult to balance the benefits and harms of a position.
The truth is that for us neutrality is not just a moral stance. It is a humanitarian stance, a pragmatic stance, which allows us to dialogue with all arms carriers and access communities in the most affected regions. Neutrality does not allow us to take sides in armed conflicts, but it does allow us to take actions in favor of the victims. It eases us across the front lines to deliver humanitarian assistance that can save lives.
For more than 50 years, our neutrality, impartiality and independence have allowed us to fulfill our humanitarian role in the areas most affected by the armed conflicts in Colombia.
In this way, last year we were able to assist more than 74,000 confined or displaced people with water and food. We obtained guarantees for our health teams to care for 382 injured or sick people, and 1,170 surviving victims of sexual violence in the middle of the war. It allowed us to recover 39 bodies of people reported missing so that they could be returned to their families, and that they could give them a dignified burial. In addition, we participated in the release of 63 people in the hands of armed groups, and we visited people deprived of liberty in 11 prisons in the country.
Likewise, our principles granted us a global space to promote the adherence of States to international instruments on international humanitarian law (IHL). Neutrality does not impose silence on the ICRC, but rather creates the necessary spaces for dialogue with those directly responsible for the alleged violations of humanitarian norms.
We insist on the importance of preserving humanitarian action and respecting its work modalities to assist the affected people
These dialogues are bilateral and confidential. Allegations are presented and, if applicable, it is sought that the parties assume responsibility for them. It is not necessary for the actions to be published on social networks for them to actually happen. This does not imply that our confidentiality is synonymous with complacency. We prioritize meeting face to face with decision makers in the midst of armed confrontations. In addition, at the ICRC we use public communication to support our multilateral work, raise awareness of IHL and other humanitarian law, and explain how we operate.
Taking a neutral stance does not, by itself, solve humanitarian problems; but it provides a logical and coherent framework for everything the ICRC does and says. Consistency is essential to build trust.
The 2022 reports from our teams on the ground allow us to affirm that the humanitarian situation in Colombia in the face of the seven non-international armed conflicts continued to deteriorate in different regions. Unfortunately, there has been an increase in the number of victims of explosive devices and attacks on health services by weapon carriers. Likewise, we continue to register hundreds of cases of missing persons as a result of armed conflicts and assisting tens of thousands of confined or displaced persons.
That is why we welcome the framework of the Total Peace policy and all the efforts that help reduce the humanitarian consequences of armed conflicts, and we insist on the importance of preserving humanitarian action and respecting its work modalities to assist the affected people.
Impartial humanitarian organizations require applying standards that are based on the constant exercise of the principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence, as well as the rigorous management of the security of all those concerned.
At the same time, we remember that humanitarian norms, such as IHL, are the floor and not the ceiling: they are the minimum and fundamental agreements that we have reached as humanity to protect those who do not participate or have stopped participating in hostilities. They are not a prebend for the parties in conflict.
All parties to an armed conflict can provide more protection than that provided by IHL, but not less. In addition, there may be agreements between parties for greater protection to apply bilaterally.
For all of the above, whenever I am asked how it is possible to be neutral in the midst of armed conflicts, the answer is the same: to be on the side of the victims of war.
Lorenzo Caraffi
Head of the ICRC delegation in Colombia