Oct 13, 2026 · 45 min · 10 segments
The number and extent of today’s armed conflicts, and the crisis of compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL), are well-recognized. In his annual report on the Protection of Civilians in…
Yousuf Syed KhanGuestMarnie LloyddHostUm, I wanted to start with a stepping back or a zooming out to think about the bigger picture.
I feel sometimes that as IHL specialists, we're quite well trained or practiced at assessing individual attacks, at least when we think about the conduct of hostilities during armed conflict.
Of course, there are some IHL rules that contemplate a broader or collective harm.
I'm thinking, for example, of the prohibition of acts intended to terrorize the civilian population or the prohibition of collective punishment.
But still, it seems to me in the face of larger crises, it can seem somehow like, I don't know, like pathetic quibbling in a way to be analyzing, for example, whether a particular attack harmed five children or 10 children, um, whether that, uh, whether five or 10 children, for example, might have breached the rule on precautions of proportionality, when really what might have happened, uh, with the bigger picture is that a whole urban center has been destroyed or in a situation when there are crimes against humanity or genocide occurring.
You've recently written about how civilian harm and, and specifically starvation actually unfolds, and how, uh, and I quote you here, uh, "Starvation in contemporary armed conflicts has arisen through patterned forms of aggregated deprivation across the basic systems people require to survive." So here as well, you talk somehow about patterns, but also the importance of understanding the systematic nature of what occurs.
Could, could you start by explaining a little bit further to us what you meant by that?
Um, I wanted to start with a stepping back or a zooming out to think about the bigger picture.
I feel sometimes that as IHL specialists, we're quite well trained or practiced at assessing individual attacks, at least when we think about the conduct of hostilities during armed conflict.
Of course, there are some IHL rules that contemplate a broader or collective harm.
I'm thinking, for example, of the prohibition of acts intended to terrorize the civilian population or the prohibition of collective punishment.
But still, it seems to me in the face of larger crises, it can seem somehow like, I don't know, like pathetic quibbling in a way to be analyzing, for example, whether a particular attack harmed five children or 10 children, um, whether that, uh, whether five or 10 children, for example, might have breached the rule on precautions of proportionality, when really what might have happened, uh, with the bigger picture is that a whole urban center has been destroyed or in a situation when there are crimes against humanity or genocide occurring.
You've recently written about how civilian harm and, and specifically starvation actually unfolds, and how, uh, and I quote you here, uh, "Starvation in contemporary armed conflicts has arisen through patterned forms of aggregated deprivation across the basic systems people require to survive." So here as well, you talk somehow about patterns, but also the importance of understanding the systematic nature of what occurs.
Could, could you start by explaining a little bit further to us what you meant by that?
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.
