Dear Lord Mayor,
Dear Professor Xylander,
Dear Gerda,
Esteemed guests,
It is a great honour for me to stand here before you and receive the Bridge Prize. It is an award that recognizes our common human endeavour to bring about a peaceful world order. I am particularly moved by the symbolism of this prize here in the historic city of Görlitz/Zgorzelec, which was long cut in two but has grown from this experience, and today stands as an example of unity and cooperation.
It is a city that transcends borders and was rebuilt by the desire for peace. The bridges that connect people here are a reminder of the strength and persistence of a shared belief in a better future.
As the president of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), I am fully aware of the importance and responsibility of our mission: to uphold standards of humanity in the midst of conflict, to build bridges across ideological divides, to act neutrally and impartially; and to remind all involved that, even in war, there are limits that must never be transgressed.
Our work to promote and enforce the law did not come about by chance. Universally valid agreements such as those enshrined in international humanitarian law not only establish a binding framework for limiting human suffering. The four Geneva Conventions, which came into being in 1949 and have since been ratified by all states, offer a vital key to political leaders for bringing about peace today, 75 years on.
Through impartial advocacy and perseverance, we can create spaces where hostile parties can recognise each other’s humanity and find a path to rapprochement. This bridge-building aspect of my current role meshes with the values of the Bridge Prize, which I am deeply grateful to receive.
I accept this prize with humility, following as I do in the footsteps of past laureates whose work is closely connected to the humanitarian values of my organization. I am thinking, in particular, of Władysław Bartoszewski, the former Polish foreign minister and Auschwitz survivor, who used his voice to defend human rights and build bridges between peoples divided by history. His commitment to justice, compassion and reconciliation reflects the ICRC’s own mission: to show the world that humanity must be preserved even in war.
War is not a lawless space. Engaging with opposing parties, respecting their rights and responsibilities and taking these seriously is more important today than ever before.
Last week I was in Sudan. When I travel to conflict regions, I witness first-hand how polarization and unfettered violence destroy entire communities. I see the suffering of civilians, who are repeatedly displaced and lack the food, medical care and safe haven that they so desperately need.
The Geneva Conventions make up the cornerstone of international humanitarian law – a catalogue of principles born of the desire to limit suffering in wartime. The conventions also form a bridge – a link between war and peace, morality and legality, brutality and mercy.
I know full well that international law does not prohibit war. Quite the contrary. There is a “right to wage war” and there are “laws of war”. Civilian casualties in war may even be considered legally justifiable, depending on the context and point of view.
The Geneva Conventions lay down that even in war, hospitals must be spared, civilians protected and the wounded cared for. The challenge, however, is that international humanitarian law does not quantify the justifiable level of suffering and destruction.
From a human perspective, though – and this is what I would particularly like to stress here today – all military or armed operations that use the suffering of the civilian population to achieve their goals are morally highly reprehensible.
For if we follow not just the letter but also the spirit of the law, then the crux of the matter is this: that human dignity must be preserved under all circumstances. For if humanity is negated and the equal rights of the enemy denied, and people are held collectively responsible, then the boundaries of what is justifiable have already been crossed, and a return to peace will be an illusion for generations.
One question must always be asked: what kind of victory do we want? Is it endless rubble, destroyed cities and millions of dead, wounded and refugees? History has shown time and again that dehumanizing the enemy ultimately drags all sides to a conflict into the abyss.
True leadership, meanwhile, is having the courage to use political means to pave the way back to normality.
Humanitarian diplomacy, for instance the negotiation of ceasefires, is nothing more than a tool for engaging in dialogue with political decision-makers, military commanders and people who may even regard the intermediary as an adversary. The work of neutral humanitarian players is most effectively supported when heads of state, politicians and diplomats take it upon themselves to remind their allies of their shared responsibility to protect civilians, to treat prisoners of war and the wounded with decency, and to uphold the principles of international humanitarian law.
As a representative of the Red Cross, I see diplomacy ultimately as an instrument in the service of peace.
Diplomacy is an act that combines reason and compassion with determination. My organization has taken on the task of reminding those in power that they have a duty towards the people they serve, a duty to comply with universal values; and that the world community will not withstand the decline of human dignity without harm.
Diplomacy as a bridge-builder between war and the responsibility to protect requires perseverance, humility and, above all, the conviction that our common humanity cannot be thrown into the balance; that every human being is equal before the law.
Yet respect for international humanitarian law is more than just a duty. It is an opportunity to de-escalate violence and pave the way to peace. When conflict parties are prepared to distinguish between civilians and combatants, spare towns and cities and provide humanitarian aid, they not only avoid breaching the law, but they also create a basis for reconciliation. How wars are fought also determines how and when they will end.
Treating the enemy humanely – protecting those not taking part in hostilities – increases the chances that both sides will one day achieve peace. A victory “at all costs” is not a victory at all, as it leaves societies in ruins and sows the seeds for the next conflict.
International humanitarian law allows us to conceive a different kind of victory – one that aims at a mutual peace agreement; a victory that always includes the possibility of returning to the negotiating table.
When talking to conflict parties, I stress to them that respect for international humanitarian law is not just a guideline. It is a responsibility that binds us all. It is first and foremost an obligation on the part of states to ensure greater security and stability for their own citizens.
When conflict parties undertake to protect women and children, to release wounded soldiers and prisoners of war, they are not just obeying the law. They are opening the way for dialogue, understanding and a possible ceasefire. Humanitarian action thus becomes a powerful tool for peace – a tool that preserves a space in which trust can be rebuilt.
In its work, the Red Cross faces the constant challenge of creating and maintaining this humanitarian space, often meeting with strong resistance, misinterpretation and even harsh criticism. But we persevere.
Our neutrality and impartiality stand as a beacon in times of great conflict and geopolitical tension. They enable us to treat all sides with respect, build relationships across divides and constantly find new ways to alleviate the suffering of civilians at least a little. Our work carries on even in the most dangerous regions of the world. It is proof of the persistence of humanity and the courage needed to uphold our humanitarian principles even in the most adverse circumstances.
Neutrality, in particular, is of crucial importance for us. When the ICRC treats wounded soldiers on both sides of the front, secures the release of prisoners or reunites families across front lines, we show that humanitarian work is a bridge that no division can sever. Whenever commanders instruct their troops to protect hospitals or allow aid supplies into besieged areas, this creates moments of shared human agency.
These moments may be fleeting, but they build the foundation without which lasting peace would not be possible. Every act that respects international humanitarian law, every gesture of compassion in times of need, helps build a legacy for peace.
The city of Görlitz/Zgorzelec is well aware of the power of such bridges. Here, where the Neisse river once separated families, friends and communities, we can see the strength that is necessary in order to start anew.
Humanitarian work, I am convinced, brings us to the following universal truth: that a common human behaviour underlies all differences. In a world full of conflict, this idea becomes a guiding force. It reminds us that in every negotiation process, every act of assistance and every person we meet, we reaffirm our recognition of the dignity and right to exist of others.
This universal message transcends borders, languages and beliefs. It is a bridge to peace in its purest form.
States are generally not, or only very rarely, truly neutral. Warring parties, by their very nature, are never neutral. This is why independent and neutral intermediaries are so necessary; as are people committed to upholding peaceful coexistence.
The inherent neutrality of the International Red Cross opens doors that would otherwise be closed. It enables us to maintain communication channels and promote mutual respect between conflict parties. This trust is not earned lightly – it requires dedication, persistence and an unwavering commitment to treating everyone equally, regardless of who they are and what they believe in.
Rather like politics, neutrality as a bridge-builder requires courage and endurance. Both of these characteristics are reflected in the unity that Görlitz/Zgorzelec has so painstakingly built. The Bridge Prize spurs me to continue along this path and to stand by my many colleagues around the world in their tireless, and often dangerous, work. I am also thinking of our key partners, the National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and their many volunteers who report to duty every day. These are often young people who are working in crisis areas, in demanding conditions, sometimes risking their lives.
For me, the Bridge Prize is not an end it itself but rather a testimony to the work that still lies ahead of us. It reminds me, and all of us, that the path to peace may be fraught with difficulty, but it is worth every effort.
May we continue this work, united in our commitment to humanity and guided by the conviction that peace is not just possible but indispensable. I would like to thank the International Bridge Award Society for the honour bestowed upon me today. My thanks also go to the German, Polish and Czech Red Cross Societies. I would especially like to thank President Gerda Hasselfeld. We are bound by mutual trust and close co-operation, which I personally cherish and uphold.
Thank you very much.
We acknowledge Source link for the information.
