Introduction

This International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) study analyses the relationship between arms availability and the situation of civilians in armed conflict. It responds to requests from States to assess whether unregulated access to weapons contributes to violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) and increased civilian harm. The analysis is based on ICRC operational experience, medical data and staff perceptions rather than arms trade or military assessments.

Current patterns of conflict and arms availability

Since the end of the Cold War, armed conflict has shifted towards intrastate violence involving fragmented armed groups, weak State authority and blurred distinctions between combatants and civilians. Large Cold War arms surpluses, porous borders and illicit trade have expanded access to weapons. Small arms and light weapons dominate because they are inexpensive, durable, portable and simple to use, including by children. Research cited shows that in 101 conflicts between 1989 and 1996, these weapons were the primary or sole means of combat. Their diffusion within societies has intensified insecurity and civilian exposure to violence.

Empirical data relating arms availability to humanitarian concerns

The study highlights methodological limits in measuring arms availability and causality in conflict zones. Evidence from stable societies nonetheless shows strong correlations between firearm access and higher rates of homicide, suicide and violent crime. In conflict settings, the ICRC surgical database provides rare quantitative insight. Of 17,086 patients admitted with weapon injuries since 1991, 35% were women, boys under 16 or men over 50, indicating substantial civilian harm. While causation cannot be proven, the evidence suggests that greater weapon availability increases the likelihood of civilian injury and IHL violations.

Patterns of weapon injury in areas with high levels of arms availability

Case studies reinforce these findings. In north-west Cambodia (1994–1995), 863 weapon injuries were recorded; 59% involved civilians. Nearly one-third were non-combat injuries, with intentional firearm injuries to civilians the largest category. Weapon injury rates rose after the withdrawal of UN peacekeepers, reaching 163 per 100,000 annually. In Kandahar, Afghanistan, weapon injuries declined by only 33% in the post-conflict period despite the absence of active fighting and no disarmament. Mortality rose from 2.5% to 6.1%, showing that violence persisted even after formal hostilities ended.

Experience of ICRC field personnel

Survey responses from 41 ICRC missions indicate widespread weapon possession across societies, including civilians and criminal groups. Assault rifles were identified as the principal cause of civilian death and injury. Seventy-six per cent of respondents perceived a link between arms availability and IHL violations, and 85% linked it to deterioration in civilian conditions. Armed threats frequently disrupted humanitarian operations, leaving around one-third of populations inaccessible due to security risks.

Proposed restraints based on respect for international humanitarian law

The report reviews international, regional and national initiatives aimed at restraining arms availability. These include UN embargoes, expert panels on small arms, and negotiations towards binding instruments against illicit firearms trafficking. Regional measures, such as the EU Code of Conduct and West African arms moratoria, incorporate humanitarian and stability criteria into export decisions. The ICRC advocates arms transfer criteria explicitly linked to respect for IHL, improved marking and tracing of weapons, destruction of surplus arms, stronger embargo enforcement and assistance to States in controlling borders and stockpiles.

Conclusion

Drawing on medical data, case studies and field experience, the study finds consistent evidence that widespread arms availability facilitates IHL violations and worsens the situation of civilians. While causality cannot be definitively proven, the convergence of findings supports stronger regulation of arms transfers and post-conflict disarmament to reduce civilian harm and improve humanitarian access.