About the author(s):
Anaïs Brunier holds a Master’s in International and Development Studies with a specialization in Human Rights and Humanitarianism from the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva.
The content of this article builds upon the analysis and findings of the author’s Master’s thesis, which explored innovative approaches to humanitarian engagement with armed non-state actors (ANSAs), focusing on how collaboration with religious leaders can promote greater compliance with International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
As the proportion of non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) has increased significantly, armed non-state actors play a central role in contemporary conflicts and are often responsible for a number of violations of IHL. Additionally, in negotiation processes with ANSAs, humanitarian organizations face a growing number of challenges, including misconception and trust issues, counter-terrorism legislation that restricts their activities, and a potential lack of alignment with the diverse cultural contexts and traditions of ANSAs.
Consequently, developing and implementing new approaches to humanitarian engagement with ANSAs seems essential. Over the last twenty years, humanitarian organizations have collaborated with religious leaders “on an ad hocbasis”, leveraging their ability to exert influence on parties to a conflict, including non-state armed groups, to foster adherence to IHL. Religious leaders are (state or non-state) actors that are formally or informally affiliated with religion and claim legitimacy to interpret religion and guide/command followers. A deeper understanding of the complexities and interactions of these partnerships appears crucial for designing more coherent and effective strategies for engaging ANSAs.
In order to achieve greater understanding on these issues, the author conducted 11 semi-structured interviews conducted with humanitarian practitioners, human rights and IHL experts, Islamic law and IHL scholars, armed groups experts and operational researchers. In this blog post, I present the key insights that came out of these interviews, linking them to existing studies wherever possible.
Moving Beyond Secularism and Legal Positivism: Religion’s Role in IHL Compliance
A key insight from this research is the need to move beyond strict secularism and legal positivism which have often dominated humanitarian discourse. These approaches depict IHL as a value-neutral body of law and tend to disconnect it from its moral and divine roots. Indeed, IHL has been rooted in the legacy of religious and philosophical principles. While religious perspectives can occasionally challenge the application of IHL, they also provide abundant opportunities to support its principles.
A number of IHL rules in NIACs align with religious values, such as the principle of distinction, care for the wounded and the sick, and the treatment of detainees. Therefore, the potential of religion to give greater traction to IHL should not be overlooked.
The Influence of Religious Norms and Leaders on ANSAs
The ICRC’s Roots of Restraint in War report has shown that religion, values and traditions are important factors in convincing ANSAs to comply with IHL. Religious leaders’ influence on ANSAs largely stems from their legitimacy within the community, as figures of authority and respect, and their power of persuasion. Religious leaders can issue religious directives to convey messages on the conduct of hostilities, support the adherence with IHL and endorse the work of humanitarian organizations. In Colombia, Catholic priests played a vital role in securing the release of detainees with ANSAs.
It is important to note that this influence operates mostly at the individual level and is highly dependent on the conflict’s specific context and the nature of the ANSA involved. Moreover, religion serves as an entry point for discussions between religious leaders and ANSAs’ members, but this relationship is also shaped by other factors such as “shared ethnic, cultural and social background”, the affinity in political goals and shared suffering.
Additionally, these discussions are not without complexity. Religious norms can also be instrumentalized by ANSAs to justify practices that may conflict with IHL principles. Thus, this relationship is often a two-way influence, as religious leaders’ interpretations can be shaped by the activities and interests of ANSAs in certain contexts.
Strategic Approaches to Humanitarian Engagement with Religious Leaders
Considering the important role of religions leaders in interpreting religious doctrine related to IHL principles, exploring engagement approaches with these actors seems for humanitarian organizations. Despite this, collaborations with religious leaders have rarely been carried out in a strategic manner. However, the interviews conducted for this research suggest that positive changes are underway, as certain organizations are taking steps towards more strategic frameworks for engagement.
First, as the relevance and feasibility of such engagement is highly context-specific, humanitarian organizations should conduct systematic preliminary research, including stakeholder mapping. The Generating Respect Project has notably developed insightful conflict and religious leaders mapping templates, encompassing a wide range of factors. This contextual knowledge is vital for selecting preferred engagement approaches. For instance, the organizational structure of an ANSA determines whether to engage with a commander using a top-down approach, or to negotiate simultaneously with different members at the same level.
In addition, interviewees emphasized efficient ways to conduct networking activities. An initial step is to engage with religious leaders, scholars and faith activists who can provide guidance and insights into the landscape, and are generally more receptive to IHL. Then, it is crucial to establish connections with more conservative and mainstream figures, since they often exert an important influence on ANSAs. Snowball sampling, where initial contacts introduce humanitarians to others, often ranked from easiest to hardest to access, has proven effective.
The relationship between humanitarians and religious leaders should be a two-way dialogue, demonstrating mutual respect and learning, as well as genuine interest. Humanitarian professionals should avoid instrumentalizing theology for their goals and should work with sensitivity to cultures and religions. One interviewee emphasized the success of a partnership between Islamic scholars and one humanitarian organization, regarding the management of the deceased and burial customs during the Covid-19 pandemic, that resulted in the production of guidance manuals, guaranteeing respect for medical guidelines, humanitarian standards, and religious traditions.
Finally, the insights gathered from the interviews highlighted the importance of building mutual and long-term trust, requiring respect, humility, patience, transparency, and sustained efforts. Relationships like that between prominent Islamic scholars with influence over Jihadi groups and the ICRC illustrate the value of sustained engagement, leading to increased acceptance of humanitarian activities in NIACs.
Ethical Considerations and Potential Dilemmas
Humanitarian organizations may encounter a range of risks and ethical dilemmas when engaging with religious leaders, including interacting with actors who violate humanitarian norms, justify harmful and discriminatory practices against specific groups, engage in proselytization activities, and make corrupt demands. These issues are not all specific to religious engagement, and humanitarian professionals can leverage their experience in navigating IHL violations and aid conditionality based on political or ethnic criteria.
Religious leaders may also face important risks such as threats to their lives and livelihood, reputational damage, and legitimacy dissolution, particularly when partnering with international humanitarian organizations in contexts where there is a strong anti-Western sentiment. Humanitarians must thus exert caution and avoid exposing religious leaders to additional risks through their collaboration.
Therefore, humanitarian organizations must carefully weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of collaboration, either prioritizing the delivery of aid by engaging with actors who may endorse harmful practices, or choosing to refrain from engagement to avoid legitimizing discriminatory narratives and actions.
Challenges for Humanitarian Organizations
Interviewees identified several challenges faced by humanitarian organizations in engaging ANSAs through religious norms and leaders. Endogenous challenges include internal secular biases within organizations, the often-high level of staff turnover, and the potential competition between humanitarian actors. These factors can hinder the effectiveness and consistency of engagement strategies deployed by humanitarians.
Exogenous challenges encompass technological advancements in warfare, security risks, general anti-Western sentiment, and growing mistrust for IHL. These elements complicate encounters due to security concerns for both humanitarian professionals and religious leaders, and may undermine trust, thus complexifying collaboration efforts to promote compliance with humanitarian principles.
Potential Ways Forward
The study explored potential solutions to enhance the effectiveness of engagement, focusing on addressing endogenous challenges. First, humanitarian organizations could rethink their approach to secularism and engagement with religious leaders. Dialogue between both types of actors should be approached as part of “secular-religious” dynamics”, where differences are acknowledged, respected, and welcome.
Second, it appears essential to reinforce human capital within humanitarian organizations. To address staff turnover’s detrimental impact, humanitarian organizations should conduct an organizational mapping, analyzing past religious collaborations and identifying successful strategies and actors involved, to ensure knowledge is institutionalized. Practical guidance documents on the complete engagement cycle, tailored for specific contexts, can support new staff wishing to get involved in this process.
Finally, enhancing collaboration within the humanitarian system is vital. By sharing knowledge, experiences, networking information, and certain data and findings, humanitarian organizations can develop more consistent and strategic approaches, avoiding duplication and competition.
Conclusion
To conclude, it is essential for humanitarian organizations to continue exploring innovative approaches to engagement with ANSAs, especially in situations where traditional negotiation has faced obstacles. While the involvement of religious leaders in humanitarian engagement with ANSAs is not a one-size-fits-all solution, it offers a valuable opportunity to enhance compliance with IHL in NIACs. Humanitarian organizations are increasingly developing strategic approaches to collaboration with religious leaders, fostering trust-based and mutual learning, lasting relationships, built on genuine interest rather than instrumentalizing religion.
Although implementing these measures requires significant time and resources, and can be challenging for many humanitarian organizations facing budget cuts and growing constraints, they may be crucial for driving long-term, meaningful change. Moving forward, monitoring the outcomes of humanitarian collaboration with religious leaders would enable organizations to refine their strategies, drawing on past successes and challenges, and preserve trust by upholding ethical standards.