The concept of a ceasefire in armed conflicts during the holidays is highlighted in the film Merry Christmas in relation to the First World War does not really exist in reality, as it is not enshrined in international humanitarian law or any other law.
• Also read: Truce or Ceasefire: Do You Know the Difference?
The year-end celebrations are a concept from the Christian religion. Since many cultures and religions do not celebrate Christmas, Christmas truce is not a common custom.
Festivals and Traditions
“In Christian countries there is a tradition of Christmas truce, such as during the First World War, when Germans and British came together to celebrate Christmas while killing each other the day before and the day after,” remembers Walter Dorn, professor in operational defense at the Royal Military College of Canada and the Canadian Forces College.
However, this is one of the rare examples where the Christian holidays were used as an excuse for a temporary cessation of fighting.
“Last year, Russia requested a ceasefire for Orthodox Christmas on January 7, but Ukraine refused” because it did not want to give Russia the opportunity to use that time to rearm militarily, Mr. Dorn explained.
In 2012, the Philippines announced a unilateral Christmas truce with the Maoists to enable the delivery of humanitarian aid.
In addition to these two examples, Sophie Rondeau, director and legal counsel for the Canadian Red Cross, explained that there is no Christmas custom in the legal sense of the word because the use of force is already regulated.
The Olympics may also be subject to a ceasefire, a position supported by the UN, Mr. Dorn cited as an example.
It also happens that members of the Muslim community who do not celebrate Christmas call for a ceasefire during Ramadan.
Role of the Red Cross and humanitarian organizations
“The Red Cross is, above all, a mediating means to remind the fighting parties that they have obligations, not only of a military but also of a humanitarian nature,” explained Sophie Rondeau.
The work of the Red Cross is impartial and is based exclusively on the relationship of trust with the parties to the conflict.
“We have incredible examples with the Taliban, Al-Qaeda or even with the Islamic State, with Boko Haram, fascinating examples of negotiations that were carried out when we never thought possible,” explained François Audet, director of the Canadian Observatory on Humanitarian Crises and Action (OCCAH) and full professor at the School of Management Sciences (ESG) at the University of Quebec in Montreal.
According to Ms. Rondeau, the Red Cross's work is first to find the right moment to pause and then to intervene as quickly as possible once a gap arises.
Importance of the international community
Like humanitarian organizations, the international community also plays an essential role in implementing ceasefires.
Mr. Dorn gave the example of the Arab-Israeli War of 1948-1949, in which the international community declared a ceasefire and the United Nations established the United Nations Armistice Monitoring Body.
However, Dorn argued that if the UN Security Council had the right to declare a ceasefire, all its members would have to agree, which could be difficult.
Ultimately, only the warring parties can reach a ceasefire, Ms. Rondeau confirmed.
“It is a duty of states, they are the ones who wage war. They are the ones who negotiate ceasefires, truces, etc.,” she added.
Role of media reporting
According to François Audet, media coverage of a conflict also plays a role in the negotiation of ceasefires or truces.
“Everything happens in what is not published, like in West Africa since the withdrawal of France […]“There is no media or humanitarian space anymore, and what happens outside is literally massacres,” he explained.
“The countervailing power of the cooperation of humanitarian organizations that advocate and prove the violation of humanitarian law, with the media that uses these trusted sources. […]“It makes it possible to bring more to light the behavior of belligerents and to put pressure on them,” he added, also pointing to the inequality of mediation depending on the conflict.
The duration of the conflict does not matter
If the humanitarian situation becomes more urgent the longer a conflict lasts, this is not a factor influencing the conclusion of a ceasefire.
“What can change are the turning points. […] It is not so much the temporality, the duration of conflicts that will influence the rules of the game, but rather who is waging war and what interpretation those belligerents have about the war,” explained Mr. Audet.
Ultimately, the only deciding factors in whether a ceasefire occurs or not are the fighting parties. “If we start making war, only those who started it can stop it,” concluded Sophie Rondeau.
Some definitions:
Armistice:
“It’s a military term, so it’s not a term you find in the law. […] Communication must be in good faith and between opposing parties. This is an agreement that regulates the cessation of military activities for a certain period of time in a certain area. It can be explained unilaterally,” Ms. Rondeau explained.
The ceasefire is the first step towards a more sustainable situation and discussions.
Ceasefire or humanitarian pause:
This is a temporary cessation of hostilities, but only for humanitarian reasons, recalled Ms. Rondeau, i.e. to help civilians and the injured and to protect international humanitarian law. It is very limited in time and space.
Humanitarian corridor:
“It is a measure of last resort because we assume that the entire conflict zone is a humanitarian corridor zone if the rules of war are respected,” Ms Rondeau added. It enables us to assist people caught in hostilities, it enables the movement of the population, it enables civilians to leave and evacuate the wounded and sick, it enables the provision of humanitarian assistance.”
IHL:
International humanitarian law is essentially a body of law that is part of international law, i.e. between states, and is applied in situations of armed conflict and protects people who do not or no longer take part in hostilities, according to the Red Crosses.
Geneva Conventions:
According to the Red Cross, the Geneva Conventions, of which there are four, are international treaties signed around 1949 with the aim of regulating and regulating armed conflicts and limiting their consequences.