Explore the alarming rise in attacks on humanitarian aid workers in global hotspots like Gaza, Sudan, and Ukraine. Learn why legal protections are failing and what states can do to improve safety and accountability.
The Silent Battleground
Aid Workers Under Fire
In an increasingly volatile world, where conflicts ravage nations and humanitarian crises unfold with devastating speed, a silent battleground has emerged, placing the very individuals dedicated to alleviating suffering in the crosshairs. Humanitarian aid workers, the frontline responders bringing medicine, food, and shelter to the most vulnerable, are being targeted with unprecedented ferocity.
This crisis transcends mere collateral damage; it represents a fundamental breakdown of international norms and legal frameworks designed specifically to protect these brave individuals.
The year 2024 stands as a grim testament to this escalating danger, marking the deadliest year on record for humanitarian workers, a tragic high that 2025 appears set to continue.
This article delves into the alarming trend of attacks on aid workers, examining why existing legal protections are failing, who the perpetrators are, and what urgent steps can be taken to safeguard those who serve on humanity’s front lines.
Understanding this escalating violence against aid workers is crucial for anyone concerned with global humanitarian challenges.
The Alarming Reality
An Unprecedented Surge in Attacks
The data paints a stark picture: humanitarian workers are facing assaults at historically unprecedented rates. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), at least 377 deaths were recorded across twenty countries in 2024 alone.
This figure not only surpassed 2023’s death toll by nearly 100 but also represented a 137 percent increase over 2022. These latest figures are three times the yearly average of the past decade and a staggering tenfold jump since the late 1990s, when Humanitarian Outcomes began tracking these incidents through its Aid Worker Security Database.
As of 2025, Humanitarian Outcomes has already documented at least 245 major attacks, which include killings, kidnappings, and incidents resulting in serious injury, along with an uptick in arrests and detentions of aid workers.
This escalating violence against aid workers is not evenly distributed but concentrated in major conflict zones that are currently dominating global headlines. Gaza, Sudan, and Ukraine are identified as primary hotspots for these egregious attacks.
In Gaza, the numbers are particularly devastating, with more than nine hundred deaths at aid sites recorded over just a few months. Sudan has witnessed 32 attacks on aid workers this year, tragically including five fatalities in a single ambush in June.
Meanwhile, organizations operating in Ukraine have reported at least 109 incidents disrupting aid delivery in 2025. Experts affirm that the world’s major wars are escalating, leading to humanitarian aid workers and sites being struck, either intentionally or caught in crossfire.
The gravity of the situation was underscored by OCHA Assistant Secretary-General Joyce Msuya, who told the UN Security Council in April, "Being shot at is not—I repeat, not—part of our job".
The Paradox of Protection
Laws Ignored
What makes this current wave of attacks particularly unprecedented and troubling is the context in which it occurs. Attacks on civilians and aid workers are not new phenomena in the history of warfare; such violence regrettably dates back centuries. However, today’s situation is unique because it unfolds despite the existence of a robust and comprehensive framework of international legal protections designed specifically to prevent such atrocities.
As David J. Scheffer, a CFR international law expert, explains, there is a "constellation of codified and customary international law that provides legal protection" for aid workers, a body of law that has only continued to expand over time. This vital framework includes:
- The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their 1977 Protocols, which establish fundamental standards for humanitarian treatment in armed conflict.
- The 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, designed to protect UN peacekeeping personnel and, with its 2010 Optional Protocol, a broader range of aid workers.
- The 1998 Rome Statute, which Scheffer himself negotiated, establishing the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, all of which can encompass attacks on aid workers.
- Various UN Security Council resolutions, such as Resolution 2730 adopted in 2023, which further address humanitarian assistance and protection in conflict zones.
Despite this formidable legal arsenal, the violence against aid workers has not abated; instead, it has intensified. This paradox is at the heart of the current crisis. Janina Dill, a global security professor at the University of Oxford, observes a "veritable epidemic of medical personnel, units, and vehicles being attacked and abused... implemented across different theaters of war," unequivocally stating that "the rules of humanitarian law have lost their respect".
Even more concerning than the sheer volume of attacks is the identity of the perpetrators. A particularly troubling trend is that the violence is predominantly being perpetrated by states themselves—even those who have ratified international humanitarian law.
This marks a significant and dangerous shift from previous conflicts, where violations typically came from local militias or non-state groups not party to the conventions, such as the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan or the Taliban in Afghanistan. Now, it is state-led militaries, legally bound by these decades-old norms, that are choosing to ignore them. Documented instances include the Israeli, Russian, and Sudanese governments striking aid sites in their respective conflicts. These governments have repeatedly rejected allegations of violating the law, claiming their aims are solely to strike military targets.
Systemic Failures and Eroding Trust
A critical mechanism designed to prevent such attacks is the "deconfliction system" or "notification system". Humanitarian workers are required to report their coordinates to this system when on duty, a protocol intended to help warring parties avoid striking aid sites. However, the tragic reality that aid workers are still being
The consequences of this failure are far-reaching and deeply damaging to humanitarian operations. Many humanitarians have lost trust in these systems and are now deliberately avoiding them. They believe that participating in such systems, by disclosing their locations, actually increases their risk, especially when militaries are perceived to be acting in bad faith. As Abby Stoddard, a partner at Humanitarian Outcomes, aptly puts it, "If you have a military such as Russia acting in bad faith, it’s kind of putting a target on your back to say where you’re going to be". This erosion of trust in protection systems is a critical challenge in humanitarian law violations.
Adding to the gravity of the situation is the disproportionate impact on local aid workers. These regional groups are the backbone of relief efforts, often being the most willing and able to gain access to the most dangerous parts of conflict-ridden countries.
Yet, they are also the most exposed and vulnerable. Joyce Msuya, OCHA Assistant Secretary-General, highlighted this stark reality, estimating that at least 95 percent of aid worker attacks in 2023 were on locals. Despite this alarming statistic, she noted, "Yet, conduct harming our local staff rarely elicits reactions or makes the news". This lack of global attention further exposes them, creating a two-tiered system of protection and recognition.
Why Deterrence is Failing?
Motivation and Accountability Gaps
The inability to prevent these persistent attacks on aid workers is not due to a lack of capacity or knowledge of international law. Instead, experts point to a fundamental problem of motivation and a severe lack of deterrence. As Oxford’s Janina Dill explains, the question becomes, "under what conditions are they ever inclined to actually follow this law?".
Several factors influence whether warring parties adhere to international humanitarian law: whether they feel they can "win" while obeying the law, whether they believe they are being watched by the international community, and whether they have something to lose from a loss of legitimacy.
In contexts where these conditions are not met, compliance falters. For example, while Ukrainian forces might obey the law to differentiate themselves from Russia and maintain international favor, the civil war in Sudan has, by contrast, "spiraled into a race to the bottom". This disparity highlights that the effectiveness of international law is highly dependent on the perceived self-interest and external pressures on warring parties.
Crucially, international law relies heavily on other states enforcing compliance with international norms. This is where a significant deficit in external pressure and accountability becomes apparent. Global courts, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), possess limited enforcement mechanisms.
The UN Security Council (UNSC), intended to be a primary enforcer of international peace and security, is frequently hampered by conflicting interests among its permanent members. With Russia (an ally of China), the United States (a long-time ally of Israel), and China holding veto power, the UNSC often lacks the unanimity required to pass meaningful resolutions, let alone ensure accountability for violations.
Furthermore, powerful states that possess the ability to exert global pressure often fail to take a firm stance. In Sudan, for example, there has been a noticeable lack of global attention compared to other conflicts, allowing atrocities to continue with less international scrutiny. In the context of Israel and Gaza, historic alliances with the United States and European leaders have frequently led to a reluctance to criticize Israeli actions, even in the face of aid worker deaths.
This reluctance was evident in March 2024, after OCHA and the Palestinian Red Crescent Society recovered the bodies of fifteen aid workers killed by Israeli forces in Rafah, Gaza.
The United States’ response was notably muted, declining to investigate and instead calling on "all parties" to adhere to international law, with a U.S. spokesperson even shifting blame toward Hamas. Rights groups have criticized this response, particularly given that U.S. law prohibits foreign governments from using American-made weapons to violate humanitarian law.
This reluctance to call out crimes, particularly from powerful Western states, significantly undermines the entire international legal system. As Dill argues, the "equal application of the law is really intrinsically important to law". Selective enforcement speaks to a profound crisis of compliance and an erosion of values once held in high regard globally.
The Financial Strain
Aid Funding Cuts
These surging attacks on aid workers are occurring at a particularly challenging time, as support for humanitarian aid is simultaneously diminishing globally. Countries like the United States and the United Kingdom are cutting funding for global aid programs, a trend that has severe repercussions. This funding is not merely for distribution; it is crucial for supporting all aspects of aid operations, including vital data collection, on-the-ground distribution, and, critically, worker safety.
When budgets are slashed, "security risk management as an organizational function is one of the first things to go," as Stoddard highlights.
This leaves aid organizations and their personnel, especially local groups working in the most dangerous areas, more vulnerable to attacks and less equipped to mitigate risks. The erosion of these protective measures directly contributes to the increasing casualties and disruptions in humanitarian efforts worldwide. Addressing global humanitarian challenges requires robust and sustained funding.
Pathways to Protection
What Can States Do?
While the challenges are immense, experts offer clear pathways for states to improve aid worker safety and enhance accountability, which are critical components for deterring attacks.
Restore Funding for Global Aid Programs
The immediate and most pressing action is to restore and increase funding for global aid programs. This financial support is indispensable for strengthening all facets of humanitarian operations, from logistical support and on-the-ground distribution to the crucial function of security risk management, which is often the first casualty of budget cuts.
Review the National Militaries’ Rules of Engagement
Domestically, national militaries must undertake a thorough review and revision of their rules of engagement. This process should aim to more precisely establish the identification and protection of humanitarian aid workers, ensuring that military protocols explicitly account for and safeguard aid personnel and sites.
Ratify International Conventions and Protocols
At the international level, states should demonstrate their commitment by ratifying the 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel and its accompanying 2010 Optional Protocol. While ninety-five states have ratified the 1994 Convention, which aims to protect peacekeeping personnel, only thirty-three have ratified the 2010 Protocol, which significantly expands protections to a broader range of aid workers. Universal ratification would strengthen the legal framework for protecting aid workers.
Ensure Third-Party Compliance and Commitment to International Humanitarian Law
It is imperative for states, particularly Western states who were largely instrumental in creating the international humanitarian legal system, to ensure a better commitment to international humanitarian law from all parties. These nations are uniquely positioned to uphold these laws and must take their instrumental role seriously
Hold Allies Accountable
Perhaps one of the most critical steps is for states to "hold even their closest allies accountable when they don’t obey the law". The current practice of selective enforcement of international law undermines the entire system, eroding its legitimacy and contributing to a crisis of compliance. This includes overcoming reluctance, often due to historic alliances, to criticize actions that violate humanitarian law, such as those seen in Gaza or the lack of global attention to the conflict in Sudan. Protecting aid workers demands an unwavering commitment to the equal application of international humanitarian law.
Conclusion
A Call for Renewed Commitment
The escalating attacks on aid workers represent more than just a tragic statistic; they signify a profound crisis of humanitarian law violations and a breakdown of the global commitment to protecting those who deliver essential assistance in the world’s most dangerous places.
The unprecedented surge in casualties, the shift towards state-led perpetrators, the failure of deconfliction systems, and the pervasive lack of accountability collectively paint a grim picture of humanitarian challenges. The erosion of trust in protection mechanisms, coupled with the disproportionate targeting of local aid workers and the diminishing support for humanitarian aid, further compounds this crisis.
The world cannot afford to become numb to this violence, as OCHA Assistant Secretary-General Joyce Msuya warned. The consequences extend far beyond the immediate harm to aid workers; they impede the delivery of critical aid, exacerbate humanitarian crises, and ultimately undermine the very fabric of international law and humanitarian principles. It is a collective responsibility to reverse this dangerous trend.
A comprehensive strategy combining renewed financial support, strengthened domestic military protocols, universal ratification of international protection frameworks, and an unwavering commitment to holding all parties-including powerful states and their allies-accountable, is urgently required.
Only through such concerted and principled action can the international community hope to restore respect for humanitarian law, rebuild trust, and ensure the safety of those who, despite immense personal risk, remain dedicated to serving humanity’s most vulnerable. The call to action is clear: protect those who protect others, for the sake of humanity itself.
Original source: Across Battlefields, Aid Workers Are Targeted More Than Ever
Post a Comment