![]() ![]() ![]() Some state representatives said Resolution 2286 sent “a strong message” and “a clear signal” from the Council of the need to protect health care. The resolution was adopted unanimously by the Council's fifteen members and cosponsored by eighty-five UN member states. 1 The resolution condemned attacks on medical care and demanded that warring parties comply with their obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law to prevent and address attacks against medical care in situations of armed conflict. In May 2016, as attacks on health care personnel, facilities, and transport in armed conflicts were increasing around the world, the United Nations (UN) Security Council adopted Resolution 2286 on the protection of medical care in armed conflict. We contend that the experience of Resolution 2286 can tell us a great deal about the value of such resolutions as a response to pressing issues of humanitarian concern. In this essay, we identify and analyze barriers that prevented the use of existing structures and mechanisms to influence the conduct of war. Yet in the years that followed, the Security Council and states took few concrete steps to implement Resolution 2286. New data collection and public attention on attacks against health care at the time signaled that, contrary to scholarly expectation, the Council might use tools already at its disposal to ensure compliance with the resolution. The resolution was adopted unanimously by the Council and cosponsored by eightyfive UN member states. In May 2016, as attacks on health care in armed conflicts were increasing globally, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 2286, demanding warring parties comply with their international obligations to prevent and address such attacks.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |