IHL and the Protection of Minorities Sandra Krähenmann Introduction Discrimination and social, economic, and political marginalization of minorities can be a structural precondition or be instrumentalised in the lead up to an armed conflict. So there are compelling arguments to include a minority rights dimensions as a factor in early warning and conflict prevention strategies. Yet, I will not further elaborate on this because the focus of my intervention is on international humanitarian law: international humanitarian law is not concerned with the reasons why an armed conflict breaks out. Instead, international humanitarian law strives to protect persons affected by armed conflict and limits the means and methods of warfare that can be used by the parties to a conflict. Importantly, parties to an armed conflict can be both state and non-state actors and international humanitarian law binds both. I am going to address three points: First, the impact of armed conflict on minorities; second the way IHL protects minorities through the prohibition of adverse distinction, and third, the prohibition of adverse distinction as a principle underlying humanitarian action. 1) Impact of armed conflicts on minorities Armed conflicts tend to exacerbate the pre-existing challenges that minorities are facing and to contribute to the deepening or instrumentalization of a divide along ethnic, linguistic and religious lines. This, in turn, often leads to the securitization of minorities in the sense that the parties to a conflict will try to co-opt them for their own purposes or see them as a threat. Although, as the Special Rapporteur pointed out in her recent report to the General Assembly, there is little or no disaggregated data on the impact of armed conflict on minorities, the available information suggests that armed conflicts disproportionally affect minorities: both states and non-state armed groups may deliberately target minorities or they may see minorities as a ‘soft target’ because they are less protected; minorities may be displaced by virtue of being a minority; and sexual and gender-based violence is often employed in a symbolic manner to attack the identity of minority groups or as part of a genocidal strategy. 2) Prohibition of adverse distinction as a guiding principle in IHL In light of the impact of armed conflict on minorities, the question is how does IHL protect them? IHL does not provide any specific protection for minorities as such. However, IHL protects minorities through the prohibition of adverse distinction, the IHL equivalent to the principle of non-discrimination in human rights. Without going into details, the prohibition of adverse distinction is a guiding principle in IHL. In particular, during both international and non-international armed conflicts, IHL prohibits adverse distinction in the treatment of civilians and other persons not or no longer participating in hostilities. The reference to adverse distinction means that in certain circumstances and depending on the special needs of certain groups preferential treatment must be granted. The prohibited grounds of adverse distinction were expanded over time and they are not exhaustive. They include adverse distinction based on race, colour, sex, language,