Physicians and international humanitarian law in complex emergencies: controversies and future opportunities.

Abstract

This paper describes the areas in which the Geneva Conventions no longer are adequate as a source of legal description or prescription for the challenges faced by physicians working in complex emergencies. It covers the conceptual pitfalls facing the medical profession in connection with humanitarian interventions, which often are conventional military operations, but are not recognized as such because they may vary in some respects from more familiar forms of interstate conflict. Emerging categories of combatants who pose a major threat during complex emergencies also are identified. Opportunities to meet these challenges with the tools and culture of medicine are explored, and are proposed to the medical community as an opportunity for leadership. The paper proposes that new, epidemiological standards should be developed in order to identify the outbreak of armed conflicts and the trigger points for application of international humanitarian law. Such could replace the political model that presently underlies international humanitarian law. It also argues that international humanitarian law is not the starting point for application of humanitarian standards in war zones, but rather is built upon a peacetime medical culture that must be replicated in complex emergencies as a precursor to effective application of the law.