Author
Gilles Michaud
UN Under-Secretary-General for Safety and Security
I serve as the United Nations Under‑Secretary‑General responsible for the safety and security of UN personnel around the world. In practical terms, that means helping tens of thousands of humanitarian workers operate in some of today’s most dangerous places, conflict zones, fragile states, and environments where violence is both relentless and evolving rapidly.
To do my job, I rely on normative frameworks, one of which is international humanitarian law.
Often called the “laws of wars,” international humanitarian law, or IHL, is the body of rules designed to limit the human cost of armed conflict. Its purpose is to protect civilians, aid workers, medical staff, and others who are not taking part in fighting, and to place limits on how wars are fought. At its core, IHL rests on a simple idea: the notion of restraint, even in war.
These rules did not emerge overnight. While the belief that warfare should be constrained appears in cultures and religious traditions across history, modern international humanitarian law took shape in response to the devastation of 19th- and 20th-century conflict. The Geneva Conventions, adopted in 1949, together with their additional protocols, now form the backbone of this legal framework. They are among the most widely ratified treaties in the world.
IHL is built on several foundational principles. Parties to a conflict must distinguish between combatants and civilians. Attacks must be proportional, meaning they must not cause excessive harm to civilians compared with the expected military advantage. Parties must take precautions to reduce the risk to civilian life and property. And anyone wounded, captured, or no longer taking part in hostilities must be treated humanely. Together, these principles are meant to preserve the notion of humanity in the conduct of war.
These principles are clear. Yet today, across conflicts around the world, they are increasingly ignored or openly violated.
Over the past seven years in my current role, I have seen a profound and troubling shift. Violations of international humanitarian law have grown in number and severity. Even more concerning is how these actions are carried out openly, often with no attempt to conceal them and with complete impunity. And when I started, the vast majority of these attacks were carried out by non-state armed groups. Nowadays, our colleagues in the field are increasingly also under threat from Member States and associated groups; the same Member States who profess an attachment to international humanitarian law.
The consequences are immediate and tragic.
In May 2024, in Gaza, a marked United Nations humanitarian vehicle was struck in the back by an explosive device launched from a military tank while traveling to the European Hospital in Rafah, killing a UN Department of Safety and Security staff member and injuring another.
In March 2026, in Goma in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a drone strike hit a residential neighborhood, killing a UNICEF staff member at her place of residence where she had been working to protect women and girls from sexual violence.
In May 2026, in Ukraine, a marked United Nations vehicle, part of a fully deconflicted humanitarian convoy, was hit twice in succession by two First Person View drones, damaging beyond repair the impacted vehicle and putting an abrupt end to the mission. Gladly, no one was injured as the occupants were able to leave the damaged vehicle before the second hit.
These incidents are not isolated. They are part of a broader pattern in which the notion of protection for humanitarian workers is steadily eroding.
This erosion of respect for IHL is aggravated by the spread of misinformation and disinformation, sometimes encouraged or amplified by state actors. When humanitarian organizations are falsely portrayed as partial or illegitimate as we see in Gaza, the effects are immediate. Staff face greater security risks, access to communities is restricted, and trust is undermined. Trust, once lost, is extremely difficult to rebuild.
This is happening at a time when funding for humanitarian response is declining, even as global needs increase. Resources for security are also under growing strain. This combination reflects a broader failure to uphold the political and moral commitment required to protect civilians and those who assist them.
This is the lived reality of humanitarian work today, operating under escalating threat, shrinking resources, and weakening legal safeguards.
In response, we have had to adapt, often in difficult ways. Risk tolerance for United Nations operations has increased significantly or else thousands of people would die. Decisions I have had to authorize since 2022 in such contexts as Sudan and Haiti would have been inconceivable only a few years ago. Humanitarian personnel are operating in environments that once would have forced operations to pause.
At the same time, cooperation has become essential. Real‑time information sharing, pooling of security assets, and coordinated advocacy are now critical to keeping people safe. Solidarity under pressure is no longer optional. It is necessary.
Equally important is sharper analysis and faster response. We must anticipate risks, adapt quickly to changing threats, and make difficult choices in real time. These decisions are not abstract. They involve people, families, and communities, and they carry consequences regardless of the path chosen.
This work has included deeply painful moments, tragedies that should never have occurred, alongside powerful examples of courage and commitment. In the most challenging circumstances, humanitarian workers continue to demonstrate the values that define their mission: humanity, courage, and compassion.
But they deserve more than words of praise. They deserve protection.
The families of those who have lost their lives need more than condolences. They deserve accountability.
At the United Nations Security Council, I have repeatedly called on Member States to show the courage and leadership needed to reverse current trends. Respect for international humanitarian law is not optional. It is a legal obligation and a moral imperative.
International humanitarian law is under stress. Whether it endures will depend on the choices state leaders make now, and on their willingness to act before the damage becomes irreversible.
Gilles Michaud is UN Under-Secretary-General for Safety and Security, a position he has held since July 2019.
Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs is an independent and nonpartisan nonprofit. The views expressed within this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Carnegie Council.
