This chapter recapitulates the significant findings of this book and evaluates it against the research questions, and hypotheses. The Sri Lankan and Sudanese cases bring substantial evidence to support the inferences of the book that the cooperation of the ICRC with these governments diluted the fundamental principles of the organization. While in Sri Lanka, the characteristics and authority of the state were the primary factors that obstructed the neutral, in Sudan, the organization performed all of its mandates, and the possibility of the neutral humanitarian operation was higher in Sudan due to the fragile nature of the central government.
KeywordsICRC Internal Armed Conflicts Neutrality Sri Lanka Sudan
- Bornet, J. M. (2011). Between Enemy Lines: ICRC Delegate 1972–2003. Geneva: ICRC.Google Scholar
- Chaulia, S. (2012). International Organizations and Civilian Protection, Power Ideas and Humanitarian Aid in Conflict Zones. London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
- ICRC. (2008). “Sri Lanka: ICRC Deplores Misleading Public Use of Its Confidential Findings on Disappearance.” News Release 19 March 2008, No. 08/50. Accessed 23 September 2012: https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/news-release/2009-and-earlier/sri-lanka-news-190308.htm.
- ICRC. (2014). “Overview of the ICRC Operations in 2014.” Accessed 2 March 2015: https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/report/12-05-emergency-appeals-2014-overview.htm.
- Pantuliano, S., S. Jaspars, D. B., & Ray. (2009). “Where to Now? Agency Expulsions in Sudan: Consequences and Next Steps.” ALNAP Lessons Paper.Google Scholar
- Schweers, P. (2009). The Changing Nature of War and Its Impact on International Humanitarian Law. Munich: GRIN Verlag.Google Scholar