The views and opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position, policies, or views of the Raoul Wallenberg Institute.
By: Dan Kuwali
In the architecture international humanitarian law (IHL), few principles are as foundational or as fragile as the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure. Today, that protection is under unprecedented strain. At the centre of this crisis lies the devastating use of explosive weapons in populated areas (EWIPA), a practice that has transformed towns and cities from spaces of civilian life into theatres of human tragedy.
From Solferino to the City Streets
The nature of warfare has changed profoundly since Carl von Clausewitz conceptualised war in the early 19th century, and since Henri Dunant’s moral awakening after the Battle of Solferino in 1859 gave birth to modern humanitarian law. Contemporary conflicts are no longer confined to distant battlefields. They are increasingly fought in cities, amid homes, markets, hospitals, schools, and places of worship.
Urban centres, which were once regarded as sanctuaries, have become primary battlegrounds. Belligerents, sometimes through ignorance and at other times through disregard of international humanitarian law (also known in military parlance as the Law of Armed Conflict), employ weapons ill-suited for densely populated environments. The results are catastrophic: civilians killed or maimed in staggering numbers, essential services reduced to rubble, and entire communities displaced, often for generations.
A Statistic That Demands Action
According to the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), when explosive weapons with wide-area effects are used in populated areas, over 90 per cent of those harmed are civilians. The overwhelming majority are women and children who are mostly people with no role in hostilities and no protection from blast, fragmentation, and structural collapse.
This single statistic explains why, in 2022, states adopted the Political Declaration on the Protection of Civilians from Humanitarian Consequences of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas. The Declaration is both evidence-driven and morally imperative.
Why a Political Declaration—When We Already Have the Law?
International humanitarian law already provides a robust legal framework for civilian protection, grounded in the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution.⁶ However, the Political Declaration reflects a critical recognition: legal norms alone have not been sufficient in practice to prevent civilian harm in modern urban warfare.
The Declaration responds to the operational realities of contemporary conflict, in which military objectives are deeply intertwined with civilian life. Despite clear legal prohibitions on indiscriminate attacks, the use of heavy explosive weapons in cities has produced predictable patterns of civilian casualties, mass displacement, and long-term humanitarian collapse.
Rather than replacing IHL, the Declaration reinforces and operationalises it. It encourages states to adopt policies and military practices that go beyond minimum legal requirements, influencing doctrine, operational planning, and rules of engagement.
Why EWIPA Matters—Especially Today
Modern conflicts increasingly involve Fight in Built Areas (FIBUA) or Military Operatioins in Urband Terrain (MOUT). In such environments, the humanitarian consequences of explosive weapons are magnified. Damage to water systems, electricity grids, hospitals, and schools creates cascading crises that persist long after hostilities end.
Explosive weapons such as artillery, air-dropped bombs, mortars, and improvised explosive devices were designed for open battlefields, not urban neighbourhoods. Their use in cities undermines civilian protection, post-conflict recovery, governance, and peacebuilding.
The African Context—and Malawi’s Leadership
For African States, the issue of EWIPA is particularly acute. Rapid urbanisation, combined with fragile infrastructure, has increased civilian vulnerability across the continent. From the Sahel to the Horn of Africa, civilians continue to bear the brunt of urban conflict.
Malawi demonstrated principled leadership by endorsing the Political Declaration on EWIPA on 18 November 2022 at the Dublin High-Level Conference, joining 83 states committed to strengthening civilian protection.
Why More African States Must Act
Despite Africa’s exposure to urban conflict, only 15 African States have endorsed the Declaration. This is deeply concerning given that nearly 45 per cent of Africa’s population now lives in urban areas , a figure projected to exceed 60 per cent by 2050.
Explosive weapons are often used in cities for their destructive efficiency and coercive effect. Yet it is civilians, particularly women and children, who suffer most. Endorsing the Declaration signals:
- Commitment to IHL principles;
- Alignment with the Charter of the United Nations and the Constitutive_Act of the African Union; and
- Moral leadership in prioritising prevention over post-conflict response.
From Commitment to Compliance: The Role of Evidence
In a world facing more than 130 active armed conflicts, evidence-based accountability is essential. In response, the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law has developed the International Humanitarian Law Compliance Monitoring Database (ICMD), which is an ambitious initiative designed to systematically collect, centralise, and analyse data on incidents with IHL relevance worldwide.
The ICMD prioritises, inter alia, encouraging state endorsement of the EWIPA Declaration, strengthening accountability, informing policy, and promoting compliance with IHL—particularly the protection of civilians and civilian objects.
A Promise to Humanity
The Political Declaration on EWIPA is more than a diplomatic instrument. It is a promise to humanity as it is a reaffirmation that even in war, there must be limits. As conflict increasingly moves into cities, the choice is stark: accept civilian suffering as inevitable, or act decisively to prevent it.
Endorsing and implementing the Declaration is not merely legal or moral. It is strategic. It signals restraint, responsibility, and respect for human dignity at a time when such values are urgently needed.
Author
*Brigadier General, Chief Strategist (J5) and Commandant Emeritus, National Defence College-Malawi, Malawi Defence Force, Extraordinary Professor of International, Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria, Visiting Scholar, Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, University of Lund, and Senior Research Fellow, African Institute of South Africa (IASA), Human Sciences Research Council (HRC).
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent those of any previous or current institutions the Author is affiliated with.