Beyond Compliance Symposium – Systemic Impacts of War in Protracted Conflicts

by | Oct 22, 2024

Editors’ note: This post forms part of the Beyond Compliance Symposium: How to Prevent Harm and Need in Conflict, featured across Articles of War and Armed Groups and International Law. The introductory post can be found here. The symposium invites reflection on the conceptualization of negative everyday lived experiences of armed conflict, and legal and extra-legal strategies that can effectively address harm and need.

The effects of armed conflict on individuals and societies are both immediate and long-term. Yet, civilian harm is often conceptually limited to direct and immediate impacts like death, severe physical harm, and the destruction of housing and property caused by anti-personnel landmines, torture, and indiscriminate shelling. This is not the full picture. The impact of war is broader, structural, enduring, and more extensive than is usually anticipated at the onset of military operations. Systemic impacts of war are even more insidious, especially as conflicts expand and become increasingly protracted.

This post asks if international humanitarian law (IHL) is suited to address the systemic effects of armed hostilities. Using illustrations of lived experiences in Sudan, South Sudan, the Central African Republic (CAR), and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), this post cautions not to overlook systemic impacts of war in favor of harms typically perceived as direct.

Defining “Systemic Impacts” and the Notion of “Reverberating Effects”

“Systemic impacts” and “reverberating effects” both represent the indirect and often extended consequences of armed conflict that significantly affect civilian populations. Systemic impacts can be defined as the broad, structural disruptions that armed conflict imposes on the essential components of a society, such as governance, rule of law, economic stability, social cohesion, health, and education. These impacts reshape the fundamental conditions that support the growth, stability, and resilience of civilian life. Systemic impacts are especially evident in protracted conflicts where they create a pervasive state of societal dysfunction, making recovery challenging even after the cessation of hostilities.

On the other hand, “reverberating effects” under IHL are the secondary effects of military operations on civilian infrastructure and services. These include the long-term consequences resulting from disruptions to essential services like water, healthcare, and electricity, which often lead to cascading harms such as disease outbreaks and further death of civilians. Although traditionally viewed as indirect harm, reverberating effects draw attention to how military operations affect not just immediate civilian casualties but also the long-term well-being of civilian populations.

Consequently, I suggest that “systemic impacts” could fall within the IHL notion of “reverberating effects” because both involve harms that are indirect rather than directly caused by combat actions. This perspective invites a re-evaluation of what constitutes “civilian harm” and requires a shift from a narrow focus on immediate physical injury to include the broader and more insidious systemic consequences of conflict. Considering systemic impacts as part of reverberating harms allows for a more comprehensive approach to assessing harm under IHL, emphasizing the importance of protecting civilians not only from direct attacks but also from the complex and cumulative consequences of protracted conflict.

Mapping Systemic Impacts

Systemic impacts can be mapped against four aspects that are critical to the functioning of a typical society or State: governance and rule of law, economic stability and prosperity, social cohesion and equity, and education and health. These are by no means conclusive, but illustrate the myriad interdependent and collective factors that enable individuals and communities to thrive. As will be addressed below, armed conflict, particularly when prolonged, disrupts these four elements at a fundamental level, resulting in societal disintegration, volatility, inequity, and the fragmentation of social cohesion. It is essential to recognize systemic impacts to evaluate in-depth the harm inflicted on civilians during armed conflict.

Rule of Law and Governance in Peril 

Military operations and the actions of armed actors often disrupt rule of law and governance, including in the fields of access to justice and land tenure systems. In South Sudan, the nascent governance structures established following independence in 2011 quickly deteriorated. Intense conflict took hold and continued for half a decade. As a consequence of both past and ongoing conflict, South Sudan has been plagued by widespread corruption including embezzlement, tribalism, and bribery impeding the rule of law. Prolonged conflict has weakened State institutions and accountability structures, creating conditions for the diversion of resources to thrive. This reality continues to severely restrict access to justice, particularly for vulnerable groups such as returnees, internally displaced persons, and people with disabilities.

Due to focusing funding and resources on military operations, the formal justice system has been crippled by inadequate infrastructure, a shortage of legal professionals, and an overwhelming case backlog, resulting in prolonged detentions and overcrowded prisons. The endemic lack of access to law enforcement officers and the judicial system became even more severe as prolonged conflict displaced officials. Many citizens turn to customary law, which, despite being more accessible, tends to be inconsistent and often fails to protect marginalized groups.

Additionally, the conflict in South Sudan has significantly exacerbated issues of land grabbing, illegal occupations, and forced evictions due to widespread displacement, increased competition for resources, and the involvement of armed actors who exploit the weakened governance and lack of accountability to seize land. This environment of insecurity and injustice for the population highlights the severe impact of prolonged conflict on the governance systems in South Sudan.

Economic Fragility 

Prolonged armed conflict has also significantly undermined economic stability and prosperity, creating fragile economic environments in different contexts. In South Sudan, for example, pervasive insecurity and prolonged warfare have resulted in widespread economic fragility resulting in theft, extortion, and forced displacement. In turn, this has exacerbated tensions between displaced and host communities, resulting in incidents of communal violence. The economic fragility caused by the ongoing conflict has also led to widespread child labor, with many children forced into work to support their families in the face of rising living costs and unemployment. Economic downturn in South Sudan, high inflation, and the diversion of State revenue has often left civil servants unpaid, further fueling corruption and extortion by both State and non-State actors engaged in the conflict.

The causal relationship between armed conflict and economic fragility is evident in the widespread establishment of illegal checkpoints in South Sudan. This has led to increased extortion, especially on key trade routes, which in turn restricts movement and trade in the country. In addition to South Sudan, conflict-induced economic crises have driven the proliferation of illegal roadblocks in CAR and Sudan, restricting access to livelihoods and basic services, and severely impacting the distribution of humanitarian aid. These examples illustrate the civilian population bearing the brunt of conflict-induced economic fragility, which exacerbates other harms experienced in armed conflict.

Inequity and Societal Breakdown

Protracted conflict significantly compromises social cohesion and equity, which are essential to the growth and rebuilding of a State. In the DRC, the ongoing exploitation of natural resources, particularly through semi-industrial mining, has exacerbated tensions within local communities, creating deep divisions. In the Mwenga territory, for example, the presence of semi-industrial gold mining has disrupted the fabric of local civil society, pitting traditional leaders against their own populations. The harmful environmental impacts of mining, coupled with the lack of contributions to local development, have fueled local conflicts and undermined trust and collaboration. This erosion of social cohesion has not only emboldened armed groups but also led to a loss of consensus on governance and resource management.

The resulting instability makes it increasingly difficult for the State to achieve a unified approach to rebuilding, as communities become fragmented and the potential for local militias to exploit these divisions grows. The situation in the DRC’s Mwenga territory illustrates the broader challenges faced by conflict-affected States, where the destruction of social systems impedes recovery and the equitable distribution of resources.

Collapse of the Health and Education Sector

Prolonged conflict severely compromises both the health and education sectors, which are fundamental pillars of any functioning society. In Sudan, the collapse of these sectors has left the civilian population struggling to access basic healthcare and education, with devastating long-term effects.

The health sector has been ravaged by attacks on medical facilities, personnel, and supplies, with an estimated 70-80% of hospitals in conflict-affected states within Sudan rendered non-functional. Outbreaks of preventable diseases like cholera, measles, malaria, and dengue fever are rampant, exacerbated by the lack of access to medical care and vaccinations. Simultaneously, the education sector is in crisis, with violent attacks on schools and the use of educational facilities for military purposes leading to the closure of most schools. Over 18 million children are out of school, leaving an entire generation without access to education.

Schools and hospitals are important in saving and sustaining the lives of children. Repeated attacks on these facilities during armed conflict pose severe risks to children, depriving them of both critical healthcare and education. This uneducated and unhealthy population of children faces heightened risks of poverty, violence, and social instability. This will continue to affect Sudanese society long after the conflict ends. The destruction of such systemic aspects of the State hinders immediate recovery and poses a significant barrier to the country’s long-term growth and rebuilding efforts.

Reverberating Effects and Systemic Impacts under IHL

The principle of proportionality in IHL requires that incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, or damage to civilian objects not be excessive in relation to the military advantage gained. This evaluation has been expanded to include some foreseeable reverberating effects, though only those which result in civilian casualties or damage to civilian objects. The incorporation of a broader scope of civilian harms, including systemic impacts, into the principle of proportionality would enable the assessment of how military operations affect the long-term functioning of civilian infrastructure and services. Further, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has emphasized that the cumulative effects of repeated attacks must be taken into account in planning military operations, suggesting that the degradation of infrastructure can lead to humanitarian crises even when only military objectives are targeted.

Integrating a broader scope of reverberating effects (including systemic impacts) into the application of IHL’s principle of proportionality would require military commanders to consider not just the immediate harm caused by an attack, but also its broader and longer-term effects on civilian life as well as livelihood, critical civilian infrastructure, and societal structures. Doing so is crucial to ensure that foreseeable systemic harm is mitigated and minimized, empowering armed actors to move beyond a narrow focus on immediate casualties, enabling a more holistic approach to civilian protection that addresses the full range of harms inflicted during armed conflict. This perspective is particularly crucial in urban warfare, where the destruction of infrastructure such as hospitals, power plants, and water treatment facilities leads to compounded harm. This perspective is also crucial in the context of protracted conflicts, especially where explosive weapons are deployed in densely populated areas over extended periods, amplifying the reverberating and systemic harms inflicted.

However, adopting this expanded view of reverberating harms will require a reassessment of how far the concept of foreseeability extends. In this regard, a careful balance must be struck between what an armed actor, reasonably informed by past experiences and lessons learned, and using the available information responsibly, could be expected to foresee on the one hand, and the imperative to safeguard the civilian population from broad, incidental, and systemic harms to critical infrastructure and essential systems on the other.

Civilian Harm: A Paradigm Shift

In sum, our collective approach to understanding the impact of war on civilian populations requires a fundamental paradigm shift. Joyce Msuya, Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator, describes this shift as “one that considers the perspective of civilians and takes into account the complex, cumulative and long-term nature of the full range of civilian harm in conflict.” A central tenet of this paradigm shift is encouraging parties to armed conflict to take into consideration the systemic effects of armed hostilities.

The concept of reverberating effects, though relatively limited in scope, serves as a critical gateway for acknowledging the broader systemic impacts of war under IHL. These indirect effects can long outlast the direct harm caused by military strikes. Moreover, the interference and disordering of essential services during urban warfare can cause cascading harms throughout society. The experiences in South Sudan, the DRC, CAR, and Sudan demonstrate that prolonged conflict not only inflicts direct damage on individuals and communities but also deeply undermines the critical structures that support societal functioning such as governance, economic stability, social cohesion, and essential services like health and education. The collapse of these systemic aspects prolongs the suffering of civilians during conflict, and leaves a legacy of disfunction, inequality, and instability that hinders recovery and development long after the guns fall silent.

***

Dr Joshua Joseph Niyo is the Regional Legal Adviser for East and Central Africa at Diakonia International Humanitarian Law Centre in Nairobi, Kenya.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Photo credit: ICRC/Paulin Bashengezi (25/02/2019, V-P-CD-E-02686) Province of Mai-Ndombe, Yumbi in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Houses destroyed during community clashes.

 

 

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email