On CNN’s website, I just read two current articles about attacks on medical personnel in conflict zones around the world. I understand their outrage. After all, until quite recently, it was understood by all involved forces that medical facilities and personnel were off limits. It was an entry level piece of every professional soldier’s training. Therein lies the problem. Most of the conflicts listed: Somalia, Sri Lanka, Columbia and Afghanistan to name a few, are being fought by amateurs.

The only “training” received by many of the combatants consists of basic weapons use and a lot of propaganda. They don’t possess our cultural history of regarding all things medical as neutral. By their understanding, everyone not them is either an enemy or a victim. Preferably both.

The International Red Cross has condemned the attacks. “Violence against medical facilities and personnel must end. It’s a matter of life and death.”, said Yves Daccord, Director General of the organization. He then explains that huge numbers of additional people are dying because these attacks prevent timely medical assistance.

A different article spoke of the need for communities to protect medical personnel. It advised using “unified community pressure to hold the perpetrators accountable”. Apparently this is intended to prevent further attacks on health workers. It’s based on traditional, community based tools for limiting internal strife. While I think this is a noble concept, I don’t think it will work any better than the head of the Red Cross telling them to stop.

Both approaches assume the perpetrators actually care what anyone thinks. If Al Shabab will block humanitarian aid shipments while thousands starve to death, do you really think they’re concerned about “community pressure”. The same is true everywhere. Those fighting to force society to conform to their views are probably used to being unpopular. I’m guessing no-one in these conflicts got the press kits announcing the unhappiness of the Red Cross, the World Health Organization and all the others. If they did, I can probably guess their reaction, and so can anyone else.

“If we attack medical facilities and personnel, we cause a lot of other people to die because they don’t receive care in a timely manner. That’s awesome!”. It’s like getting bonus value for every bullet and bomb they expend.

The outrage over these attacks, while genuine, is irrelevant for two reasons.

First, moral outrage requires a shared set of moral values. Otherwise it’s like a child on a playground telling the bully it’s not fair when he beats him up. The bully knows it’s not fair, that’s why he does it. If no one stops him, he’s going to keep doing it.

The second problem is the message. “Don’t Shoot The Doctor” is a noble sentiment. It also fails to address the real problem. When thousands are being murdered, starved, raped and brutalized; it seems naive to think that medical personnel, would be exempt.

All the condemnation and outrage aren’t going to make a difference. Anyone reading CNN, or seeing coverage of the press conference on the evening news, already knows it’s wrong to kill doctors. They also know it’s just as wrong to kill anyone else. This blog has as much chance of stopping the killing as they do, and with a much smaller budget.

If no one else is listening, maybe it’s time to change the message. If you want to claim the moral high ground you need to be a bit more inclusive. None of those who need to hear will listen, but I like this one better.

“DON’T SHOOT ANYONE!”

Cheers, Winston