Choose humanity over unbounded violence by UN News, Red Cross, WVI, ICAN, agencies 8:49am 28th Jan, 2026   Statement by Elyse Mosquini, Permanent Observer to the United Nations of the International Committee of the Red Cross, at the 60th plenary meeting on strengthening of the coordination of humanitarian and disaster relief assistance of the United Nations:    "The number of armed conflicts being fought around the world has more than doubled in the last 15 years, to around 130 today.    All too often, we see the rules of war violated – direct attacks against civilians, children recruited to fight, civilian infrastructure targeted, patients in hospitals slaughtered.    We see sexual violence and starvation used as weapons of war, indiscriminate bombardments of urban centers, killing and maiming. Brutal violations are committed in plain sight, signaling that the unacceptable risks to become normalized.    The human toll is staggering. Civilian casualties in armed conflict are reported to have increased by 40% in 2024 from the previous year, while civilian casualties from explosive weapons of war have reached their highest level in more than a decade. In 700 hospitals supported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, surgical admissions for weapon wounds have increased by almost 50% in 2024.    Conflict is not only becoming more widespread, entrenched, and brutal – but also more deadly for civilians.    Principled humanitarian action, which should bring relief to this suffering, is under increasing pressure. The lines between humanitarian, military, and political agendas are blurring, and “with us or against us” narratives are eroding space for neutrality.    2024 was the deadliest year on record for humanitarian personnel, and this trend continues in 2025.    The consequences are catastrophic: when aid cannot reach those in need, civilians face starvation, disease, and preventable death.    All states have an obligation under the Geneva Conventions to respect and ensure respect for international humanitarian law, including to facilitate access for impartial humanitarian action.    What is tolerated today will define how wars are fought tomorrow. The International Committee of the Red Cross urges all states to act to prevent destruction and brutality from becoming our new normal".    Humanitarian Outlook 2026: A world succumbing to war    Armed conflict is now a defining feature of our time. Across continents, the rules and limits that should protect civilians in war are being stretched, ignored or dismantled.    Conflicts are spreading, lasting longer, and becoming more complex. Civilians – the very people international humanitarian law exists to protect – are those who suffer the most.    Even for those who experience war only through the headlines, today’s conflicts are shaping a future that will affect every one of us. The erosion of the rules of war is not confined to distant battlefields; it threatens the stability, security and values that underpin our societies and our lives, no matter where in the world we live.    The Humanitarian Outlook 2026 is the ICRC’s publication accompanying our 2026 global appeals. It provides a forward-looking analysis of emerging humanitarian risks, based on real-world observations from our organization’s operations worldwide.    The Outlook is designed to inform governments, donors and decision-makers about the evolving nature of armed conflict, the humanitarian consequences for civilians, and the priorities required to respond effectively and prevent further suffering.    In Humanitarian Outlook 2026, we draw on our work in more than 100 armed conflicts to warn of four converging trends pushing the world toward deeper instability and human suffering.    The Outlook highlights a stark paradox: as needs rise rapidly, the resources available for principled humanitarian action are under growing strain.The number of armed conflicts continues to climb, reaching around 130 in 2024 - more than double the number just 15 years ago. Over 20 conflicts have lasted for more than two decades, leaving entire generations who have known nothing but war.    Front lines today stretch across physical and digital worlds. The use of drones, artificial intelligence and cyber operations is accelerating and transforming the conduct of hostilities, too often with devastating effects on civilians.    More than 204 million people now live in areas under the full or contested control of armed groups – beyond the reach of state institutions and basic services.    The consequences are severe:    Homes, hospitals, schools and water systems are destroyed. Livelihoods collapse, displacing millions. Families are torn apart: 284,000 people are registered as missing by the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement – a 70% increase in just one year.    Trend 1: Dehumanization spreading on all fronts    Across many conflicts, the shared sense of humanity that restrains violence is eroding. Dehumanizing language - often echoed by political leaders or amplified through social media - fuels fear, polarizes communities, and justifies violations.    This shift has real consequences. When people are stripped of their dignity through words or policy, the threshold for violence rises. Civilians are misidentified as threats; detainees are denied legal protections; humanitarian workers face suspicion or hostility.    Trend 2: Principled humanitarian action under threat    Humanitarian and medical workers are increasingly targeted, despite protections under international law.    In 2024 alone: 338 attacks against humanitarian workers were recorded. Over 600 attacks struck health facilities and personnel between 2023 and 2024. 25 Red Cross and Red Crescent volunteers and staff lost their lives in 2025.    Neutral, impartial humanitarian action is being politicized, manipulated or obstructed. Access to people in need remains critically restricted in places such as Gaza and Al-Fashir, leaving civilians without essential assistance.    Trend 3: Victory at any cost, and global responsibility in retreat    Respect for international humanitarian law (IHL) is weakening. In many conflicts, military objectives take precedence over the obligation to protect civilian lives.    Hard power is resurging, and multilateral cooperation is at risk. Global defence spending reached 2.7 trillion USD in 2024, while the entire humanitarian system appealed for just 50 billion USD – an amount that still went unmet. This imbalance signals a world preparing for war, not peace.    Trend 4: Humanitarian needs rising, resources strained    At a time when needs are escalating, funding for neutral, impartial humanitarian action is increasingly uncertain. Without sustained support, millions of people risk losing access to essential services, protection, and life-saving assistance.    This widening gap is fundamentally at odds with the scale of human suffering seen across today’s conflicts.    Five calls to action in defense of humanity    States have a decisive role to play in preventing the world from sliding further into unrestrained warfare. The ICRC urges governments to act now:    1. Sustain principled humanitarian action    Provide predictable support for neutral, impartial and independent humanitarian assistance so aid can keep pace with rising needs.    2. Uphold international humanitarian law – and urge allies to do the same    Respect for IHL must remain universal. States must prevent violations, both in their own conduct and among those they support.    3. Counter dehumanization    Reject harmful narratives, misinformation and rhetoric that deepen suffering and normalize brutality.    4. Protect humanitarian workers and medical personnel    Attacks on aid workers are attacks on humanity. States must ensure they can work safely and reach people in need.    5. Work for peace and restore global solidarity    Humanitarian action can alleviate suffering, but only political solutions can end it. States must invest in diplomacy, conflict prevention and humanitarian restraint.    The choice before us    As wars multiply and the cost of destruction exceeds what any society can rebuild, the world cannot afford indifference. Upholding the rules of war is not only a legal obligation - it is a safeguard for our shared humanity.    Together, we can choose restraint over escalation, dignity over dehumanization, and humanity over unbounded violence.    http://www.icrc.org/en/article/humanitarian-outlook-2026 http://www.icrc.org/en/publication/icrc-humanitarian-outlook-2026-world-succumbing-war    Dec. 2025    Humanitarian agencies are witnessing alarming human suffering due to a proliferation of conflicts    This statement is delivered on behalf of 108 Non Governmenmt Organisations, including humanitarian organisations with operations in countries covered by the Global Humanitarian Overview (GHO):    We are witnessing unspeakable human suffering due to the proliferation of conflicts lacking political solutions and the normalization of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) violations. Indiscriminate attacks on civilians and humanitarian workers, the bombing of schools and hospitals, and the use of starvation and sexual violence as methods of warfare are devastating communities worldwide.    Climate shocks, economic fragility, and protracted conflict are exacerbating humanitarian needs, leading to unprecedented levels of displacement and an escalating global hunger crisis.    Boundary-setting and narrower definitions of people in need are resulting in a highly prioritized 2026 GHO. With limited complementarity with development and other actors, it is unclear who will target those left behind. Despite exceptional prioritization efforts, humanitarian funding lags behind and Overseas Development Assistance cuts impact both humanitarian action and development gains.    We must turn the tide together in 2026. We urge donors to fully fund the 2026 GHO and to provide quality funding as early as possible in the year to enable flexible, timely, and principled humanitarian action.    The catastrophic effects of IHL violations – including on children, women, and people living with disabilities – urgently require donors’ re-commitment to the traditionally underfunded sectors of gender and Gender Based Violence, education and child protection in emergencies, and the stepping up of funding for hunger and forced displacement.    We call for a substantial increase in the volume and quality of funding to local and national actors, including Women’s organizations, whose essential leadership in humanitarian response must be recognized. This should be rooted in accountability to - and meaningful participation of affected people.    All stakeholders must redouble efforts to prevent and resolve conflict, and we urge humanitarian, development, peace and climate actors to work together to make nexus programming a reality and foster resilience. This requires increased Overseas Development Asistance (ODA) directed to fragile settings.    Nothing will reduce humanitarian needs unless civilians are protected. The 75th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions is also a year of unconscionable IHL violations. We urge parties to conflicts to abide by their obligations, and we call on governments to leverage their influence and ensure that the consistent application of IHL is a top priority.    http://www.wvi.org/newsroom/emergencies/nogs-call-action-and-funding-global-humanitarian-overview http://reliefweb.int/report/world/year-no-other-ngo-statement-launch-new-un-2026-appeal http://humanitarianaction.info/document/global-humanitarian-overview-2026/article/trends-crises-and-needs-world-breaking-point http://globalprotectioncluster.org/index.php/publications/2393/communication-materials/advocacy-note/high-level-humanitarian-donors-briefing http://www.unicef.org/press-releases/unicef-calls-urgent-investment-life-saving-services-children-global-humanitarian    http://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-prioritize-feeding-110-million-hungriest-2026-global-hunger-deepens-amidst-uncertain http://www.unhcr.org/news/press-releases/despite-funding-cuts-unhcr-responded-multiple-complex-emergencies-last-year http://www.nrc.no/news/2025/december/2026-millions-in-need-will-not-get-aid-unless-global-solidarity-revived http://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/analysis/2025/12/11/abrupt-transitions-global-humanitarian-overview-pushes-dangerous-trend http://www.rescue.org/press-release/irc-emergency-watchlist-2026-new-world-disorder-driving-unprecedented-humanitarian http://www.actionagainsthunger.org/publications/global-hunger-hotspots-report-2026/    Feb. 2026    Nuclear weapons threaten everyone on the planet, by Melissa Parke - Executive director, International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons    We have entered 2026 with the highest threat ever from nuclear weapons, and we are on the cusp of the expiration of the last remaining arms control agreement between the United States and Russia, the New START treaty, removing the last restraints on an accelerating arms race.    This dangerous moment comes on Feb. 5, 2026 as both countries are using military force against other countries illegally — Ukraine and Venezuela, respectively — to coerce them into complying with their demands as signs also point to another US attack on Iran.    Underlining the threat we face, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock was moved forward on Jan. 27 to 85 seconds to midnight, the closest it has ever progressed since its creation in 1947 to the time that signifies humanity’s annihilation.    Contrast the current situation to the optimism that was felt at the end of the Cold War, when many people assumed that nuclear weapons arsenals would shrink, eventually to be retired as relics.    Instead, mostly without impinging the reality on public consciousness, the original nuclear-armed states, Britain, China, France, Russia and the US, defying their commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), did not disarm. Rather, they are building a new generation of weapons.    Since the 1990s, three more countries that are not parties to the NPT — India, Pakistan and North Korea — have joined the “nuclear club,” while Israel continues to refuse to admit it has such weapons, though the rest of the world assumes it has them.    Yet, there is a bright spot on the disarmament horizon: the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), which has been in force for five years as of Jan. 22.    The treaty was established after discussions shifted around nuclear weapons by focusing on the humanitarian effects of their deployment. The debate sparked impetus for a new effort to abolish nukes that culminated in a UN treaty that, as of the end of 2025, a global majority of countries had signed or ratified.    While the leaders of the nuclear-armed states have so far refused to join it, turning their backs on the rest of the world and isolating themselves from the broader community of nations, the treaty’s architects always envisaged disarmament would not happen immediately.    Inspired by the land mines and cluster munitions bans, the idea is that as more countries join the TPNW, clinging to these weapons will become less acceptable as the diplomatic and reputational costs of doing so will become greater, leading to the nuclear-armed countries realizing it is no longer useful to keep them.    Adopted in 2017, the treaty came into force in January 2021. Although the countries with nuclear weapons and their nuclear-weapons-endorsing allies have tried to pretend the ban does not exist and dismiss the TPNW as purely symbolic, this is hardly true.    As we marked the fifth anniversary of the TPNW’s entry into force on Jan. 22, we took stock of how the treaty is working and how it has changed the geopolitical and humanitarian landscape.    First, nuclear weapons are now banned under international law, like other weapons of mass destruction. This is a major landmark.    The TPNW has also strengthened the nuclear taboo that developed from the knowledge of what happened to the people hit by the first nuclear bombs — relatively small by today’s standards — in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A quarter of a million people died within four months and catastrophic, lingering and intergenerational harm has affected the survivors.    Nuclear weapons threaten everyone on the planet, so everyone should have a say in them. The TPNW has broken the stranglehold that nuclear-armed states and their misguided, dangerous doctrine of nuclear deterrence had on the public debate around nuclear weapons.    Now, the 99 countries that have signed or ratified the treaty so far are directly challenging this baleful doctrine as a threat to all countries and an obstacle to disarmament, while providing an alternative to deterrence through the TPNW.    The treaty has strengthened the international consensus that threats to use nuclear weapons are inadmissible. After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, using nuclear threats to try to intimidate others not to support Kiev, TPNW members gathered at their first meeting a few months later in Vienna and issued the first multilateral condemnation of such threats.    Their condemnation has since been echoed by the G20 and individual leaders, including German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and US President Joe Biden at the time as well as China’s President Xi Jinping.    By putting humanitarian concerns at the center of the push for nuclear disarmament, TPNW countries addressed the reality that the weapons are designed to cause mass, indiscriminate and lingering damage to civilians.    The TPNW has also inspired many investors to take their money out of nuclear weapons production. Financial institutions representing at least $4.7 trillion of global assets have cited the treaty as a reason for no longer doing business with the nuclear weapons industry.    This year, both the NPT and the TPNW will hold major conferences where progress in treaty implementation is reviewed and their members decide on their next steps.    The NPT meets in April, for its 11th review conference, but there has been no agreed outcome to the last two such conferences, and the prospects are dim for the meeting. In contrast, TPNW states meet in early December for its first review conference, and members are optimistic they will agree to strengthen the treaty’s impact. That includes the crucial act of providing international support for tens of thousands of victims of the more than 2,000 nuclear-test explosions across the globe since 1945.    The countries that pose the threat through their continued possession of nuclear weapons — or support for their use, chiefly, US allies and Belarus — could start to mend their reputations at these conferences by agreeing to progress at the NPT and by attending the TPNW conference as observers.    In a world where great-power rivalry and a zero-sum approach to international relations has returned with a vengeance, the TPNW shows that multilateral dialogue and diplomacy are still very much alive and that it is possible for countries to work together to save us from destroying ourselves.    * The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapon was the Nobel Peace Prize winner in 2017.    http://passblue.com/2026/02/01/the-right-way-to-stop-a-new-nuclear-arms-race/ http://www.icanw.org/ http://thebulletin.org/2026/01/press-release-it-is-85-seconds-to-midnight http://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/2026-statement/ http://theelders.org/news/elders-urge-usa-russia-halt-nuclear-arms-race-new-start-expires http://news.un.org/en/story/2026/02/1166892    Aug. 2025    80 years after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: A call to eliminate nuclear weapons, from the President of the Japanese Red Cross Society, Atsushi Seike, and President of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Mirjana Spoljaric.    “Let all the souls here rest in peace for we shall not repeat the evil.”    These are the words carved into the stone monument at Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. Eighty years after the world witnessed the horrifying tragedy caused by nuclear weapons, we must ask ourselves: Are we taking this pledge seriously? Are we doing enough to ensure the memory of what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki is not forgotten? And, critically, are enough efforts being made to rid the world of these devastating weapons?    Eighty years ago, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were reduced to ash and tens of thousands perished in mere seconds. The registers of both atomic bombings’ victims exceed 540,000, including those who died after suffering from the long-term effects of radiation. This number continues to grow even now.    To this day, survivors – Hibakusha – continue to endure the physical and emotional toll of these weapons. They are still being treated by Japanese Red Cross hospitals for radiation-induced illnesses. This fact underscores the lasting consequences of nuclear warfare.    The risk of intentional or accidental use of nuclear weapons is terrifyingly real. There are far more nuclear weapons today than there were 80 years ago. They are also far more powerful. The bomb dropped on Hiroshima - with a yield equivalent to 15,000 tons of TNT - would today be classified as a small nuclear weapon.    Any use of nuclear weapons would be a catastrophic failure of humanity. In particular, no humanitarian response could ever address the suffering resulting from a nuclear detonation in or near a populated area. It is extremely doubtful that nuclear weapons could ever be used in accordance with the principles and rules of international humanitarian law.    Two years ago, ahead of the G7 Summit held in Hiroshima in May 2023, we issued a joint statement in which we called on the international community to eliminate nuclear weapons.    And yet instead of advancing towards nuclear disarmament, we see a growing emphasis on nuclear weapons in military postures and doctrine along with the renewal and expansion of nuclear arsenals.    However, there is reason to not lose hope. The desire for a world without nuclear weapons is widely shared among many nations. The number of state parties to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) is growing. Seventy-three states are now parties to the treaty and another 25 have signed it.    The experience of Hiroshima and Nagasaki 80 years ago should be proof enough that nuclear weapons are too dangerous for the world to keep.    We again call on all states to never use or threaten to use nuclear weapons, to adopt risk-reduction measures to prevent their deliberate or accidental use, to end reliance on them as a means of national security, and to work towards their complete elimination by joining the TPNW or other similar means.    We also urge governments to provide education to ensure that awareness of the dangers of nuclear weapons is passed on to future generations so that the unimaginable harm they inflict on civilians is never forgotten.    http://www.icrc.org/en/article/hiroshima-80-years-humanitarian-imperative-eliminate-nuclear-weapons http://news.un.org/en/story/2025/08/1165583 http://www.dw.com/en/japan-marks-80-years-since-the-hiroshima-atomic-bombing/a-73542738 http://www.dw.com/en/risk-of-nuclear-war-grows-amid-new-arms-race/a-72894853 http://www.icanw.org/80years http://childrenspeacememorial.org/ http://www.icanw.org/hibakusha http://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2024/nihon-hidankyo/lecture/ http://www.ne.jp/asahi/hidankyo/nihon/english/weapons/weapons1.html http://theelders.org/news/no-more-hiroshimas-elders-call-urgent-nuclear-dialogue-conflict-risks-rise http://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2025/nuclear-risks-grow-new-arms-race-looms-new-sipri-yearbook-out-now    http://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2024/role-nuclear-weapons-grows-geopolitical-relations-deteriorate-new-sipri-yearbook-out-now http://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/nuclear-risk/ http://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2024-08-06/secretary-generals-message-the-hiroshima-peace-memorial-the-79th-anniversary-of-the-atomic-bombing-of-hiroshima http://www.un.org/en/observances/nuclear-weapons-elimination-day http://disarmament.unoda.org/wmd/nuclear http://thebulletin.org/2025/07/the-nobel-laureate-assembly-declaration-for-the-prevention-of-nuclear-war/ http://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-02271-w http://futureoflife.org/project/artificial-escalation/ http://futureoflife.org/project/mitigating-the-risks-of-ai-integration-in-nuclear-launch/ Visit the related web page
	Next (more recent) news item
	Next (older) news item