Mmegi

When neutrality looks like taking sides: The Red Cross, separatists and a crisis of trust

Mugabo
Mugabo

For decades, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has explained its work through a simple formula: in order to help victims of war, it is necessary to speak to all sides in a conflict. If a territory is controlled not by a state, but by an armed group, insurgents or a separatist administration, access to civilians, the wounded and prisoners is impossible without contact with the actual power on the ground.

But this is where neutrality stops looking neutral in the eyes of states. What Geneva calls humanitarian dialogue is increasingly perceived in the capitals of affected countries as a way of working around sovereignty. The ICRC itself acknowledges that it maintains contact with hundreds of armed groups; according to its 2025 assessment, this concerns 383 groups of “humanitarian concern” – insurgent, separatist and jihadist structures that control or contest territory with states in more than 60 countries, where around 204 million people live in total. Contact is maintained with roughly three-quarters of them.

Ogaden: When the Red Cross is expelled over accusations of links with insurgents

Editor's Comment
Let the courts follow the money

“Law and order are the medicine of the body politic and when the body politic gets sick, medicine must be administered.”– B.R. AmbedkarThe amount of money at play threatens to test the integrity of the country’s financial system, giving more reason to why the courts must be fully given leeway to lean on the matter and reach a conclusion.Botswana has spent decades building her reputation as a stable and credible financial jurisdiction.The...

Have a Story? Send Us a tip
arrow up