In peacetime and wartime alike, it is not sufficient to ask, “how many died”, but also “who died”. (Dardagan & Sloboda, 2016: 1)
Since the 1800s, over 37 million people have died while actively fighting in wars (Herre et al., 2024). Although this constitutes a substantial figure, this data only accounts for active combatants, whose presence in conflict is monitored and recorded with much more precision than their civilian counterparts (Giger, 2016). Much of the discourse surrounding the casualties of armed conflict considers those who die serving their country to be heroes worthy of much admiration, while all others are tragic victims who must be mourned (Joyner & Shanks Kaurin, 2020). Such discussions encourage very different approaches when documenting these losses; 90% of the casualties sustained during conflict are civilians (UNSC, 2022), yet there is no totally comprehensive dataset for these individuals, compared to the several official archives of deceased military personnel. This is due to a plethora of reasons, including but not limited to, organizational struggles, political barriers, lack of access to the conflict scene and lack of resources (Khorram-Manesh et al., 2021). Responsibility for documenting civilian casualties frequently falls to NGOs such as Iraq Body Count (IBC), Airwars, and Action on Armed Violence (AOAV). This duty of documentation should be shouldered by states (Browne, 2021), who readily accept responsibility in the case of soldier casualties but neglect the civilian victims. States are legally obligated to record casualties, as well as perform several other measures such as searching for all missing civilians, collecting casualties from the conflict area as soon as possible, and burying them individually (Breau & Joyce, 2011). However, in times of conflict, these tasks tend to be disregarded in favor of other wartime activities, and the civilian casualties are ignored or hidden. Such a disservice extends to those countless unidentified victims, whose fate remains unknown without the diligent efforts of casualty recorders.
This article will employ a human security approach, placing the individual as the centerpiece for security consideration (Hamourtziadou, 2017), to explore three key arguments confirming why it is important to document all of the casualties of armed conflict, regardless of their occupational status. Despite the common inclination to consider casualties of armed conflict only as fatalities, as defined by the United Nations in 2023 (UN, 2023a), the plethora of broader harms which can occur in this context will also be included in the discussion. Before each argument is presented, there will be a brief overview of several casualty recording databases for context, focusing on what they record, how they operate and any major differences/similarities in their work. Even though its data is not utilized in the main body of this article, the casualty recording database Shireen will be included, to compare its unique composition against the other databases. Following this, the first argument will propose ideas around dignity and respect for the victims and their families will be analyzed, and how the documentation of casualties ensures support is available to those affected. Second, the role of documentation in the promotion of accountability and human rights protection will be examined through the discussion of evidencing abuses, advocating cases, and implementing preventive measures for future conflicts. Finally, the ability for casualty recording to inform policy and action in combat situations will be addressed, with reference to both immediate and long-term solutions, as well as broader implications and keeping accurate historical records. An update regarding the ongoing situation between Israel and Palestine from the perspective of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will conclude this article, providing recent examples of the impact of casualty recording on policy, legislation and advocacy. Prominent counter-arguments will be confronted throughout this research, in order to present the argument with consideration of multiple theoretical perspectives and argue the imperative to comprehensively document all the casualties of armed conflict, irrespective of their involvement with the military.
Casualty recording databases
There are many databases dedicated to recording the casualties of armed conflict. This section will give an outline of the databases most commonly cited throughout this article, comparing their strategies and inclusion criteria. IBC holds the largest public database of violent civilian deaths since the coalition invasion of Iraq in 2003 (IBC, n.d.a). IBC researchers recorded not only those killed in the invasion, but all civilian deaths since, resulting from the security conditions that followed the invasion. The IBC project also includes a separate total for combatants killed during the fighting. This database compiles data from media reports as well as a variety of official records such as NGOs, hospitals, morgues etc., in order to gain the most holistic account of events, endeavoring to include names, ages and occupations of those harmed wherever possible. IBC data has been used not only in discussions surrounding the ethics and methodologies of casualty recording but has also been referenced in parliamentary debates and in reports placed before key governmental departments in both the UK and the US.
In a similar way, AOAV is a charity which records and investigates instances of violence against civilians (AOAV, n.d.), yet there are some key differences between its work and the work of IBC. While IBC focuses on the war in Iraq, AOAV covers attacks across the globe, and has a particular interest in the weapons used in these cases. AOAV holds a specific focus on disarmament, rather than sole documentation, and works toward many conventions and commitments on armed violence. Furthermore, AOAV does not attempt to be comprehensive in their recording of attacks (unlike IBC), instead aiming to serve as a general indicator of the scale and pattern of violence. Unlike IBC, the organization uses only English-language news sources. However, much like IBC, AOAV disseminates their work to many significant organizations, including the United Nations, UK Parliament, public debates, and individual think-tanks.
On the other hand, Every Casualty Counts (ECC) provides a different service to the above organizations, acting as the link between various casualty recorders and providing support to them to undertake their job (ECC, n.d.). ECC provides resources and information to those who work for casualty recording institutions, connecting them all under unifying strategies and standards rather than physically collecting data themselves. The standards and recommendations provided by ECC are in collaboration with UN agencies and expert members of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and apply both to those collecting the data and those who intend to make use of the data collected by others. ECC is an overarching body which aims to support the development of the casualty recording field, through provision of expert advice, facilitation of peer exchange, utilizing professional standards and advancing efforts of international advocacy (Hamourtziadou, n.d.).
Documenting the casualties in the current conflict between Israel and Palestine, Shireen is a database unlike those mentioned above. While others focus on the fatalities of conflict (whether they occur directly or indirectly), Shireen includes data regarding arrests, displacement, injuries and the destruction of facilities in addition (Shireen, n.d.). It also includes photographs of those killed in the conflict, reminding those across the world of their humanity. The database itself was created to continue the work of Shireen Abu Akleh, a Palestinian journalist killed by an Israeli bullet while she was reporting on events in Jenin. The details and images included to share her story, and the stories of other victims, are especially poignant in promoting the message that the killing of reporters will not deter the tireless efforts of casualty recorders in exposing the devastating effects of these conflicts.
These distinct yet complementary approaches to casualty recording demonstrate the multifaceted efforts to document and understand the impact of armed conflict on civilian populations.
Respecting the lives of the casualties of armed conflict
Regardless of whether they are soldiers or civilians, individuals who become casualties of armed conflict endure profound trauma (Cymdeithas y Cymod, 2024). In the aftermath of these events, it is paramount to extend the principles of dignity and respect to all affected, including those who have passed and those who survived.
A common way to recognize the lives of casualties is through the creation of soldier and civilian war memorials. The responsibility for planning and funding these memorials often falls to local communities and organizations, with the government typically assuming responsibility only for major national displays such as the Armed Forces Memorial, which is inscribed with the names of all those who have perished while on military duty since 1945 (Brooke-Holland, 2015). Across the globe, memorials for those who died during conflict are numerous, with over 526,000 Commonwealth casualties in the First World War memorials alone (Commonwealth War Graves, 2022). These memorials commemorate the lives and sacrifice of not only the soldiers, but also animals and civilians killed in the fighting, as seen in the Civilian War Dead Roll of Honour, 1939–1945 (Nell, 2021). In general, civilian memorials are more understated and intimate than those erected for military personnel, commonly financed, and maintained by the communities of those affected (Brooke-Holland, 2015). Despite their more subdued appearance, the significance of such memorials must not be misunderstood. Civilians may be less documented than soldier casualties, but their families’ commitment to the maintenance of individual gravestones highlights that they are viewed as equally worthy of a memorial in their eyes (Dardagan et al., 2010). While casualties during conflicts of the past were more closely concentrated among the combatants, this has changed since the 20th century, where there is now little to no distinction between those fighting and those caught in the crossfire (Walsh, 2023). Establishing a memorial serves as a dignified tribute, preserving their memory and recognizing their contributions where appropriate.
As advocated by human security, prioritizing not only physical safety but also the holistic well-being and spiritual dignity of individuals is significant and should not be overlooked (United Nations, 2016). While not mentioned explicitly in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), it has been argued that the deceased should share in this protocol (ICRC, 2020). As set out by the ICRC in 2020, those who die during armed conflict should be handled with respect and sensitivity in accordance with International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and guidelines. This perspective can be extended to consider the processes of ongoing acknowledgment of casualties even after their burial. Occasionally, it is not possible to erect a memorial, as the fighting persists, making locations unsuitable. In such instances, the use of casualty recording databases online provides a space to document and respect the losses without infringing upon an already volatile landscape. Acknowledging the importance of human lives, their narratives, and the lasting impact they carry even in their absence is profound. These individuals are not simply statistics; they are unique, loved beings deserving of the dignity afforded by casualty recording and commemoration.
Support for the family and the community of the casualties
Building on this, documentation is also important as it provides support and closure for the families and the communities of the casualties (Dardagan & Sloboda, 2016). A vigil hosted by students at Yale University focused on commemorating all victims of the Israel–Palestine conflict and provided a space for the predominate faiths in that region to mourn together (Hernandez, 2023). The Israel–Palestine conflict has been ongoing for decades, claiming at least 34,000 Palestinian and 1,200 Israeli lives since the attacks on 7 October (Siddiqui, 2024), the majority of which are civilians (McDoom, 2024). Events like the one hosted by the students serve to document and recognize the casualties of conflict and offer a space for communities to provide security for one another in devastating times. When physical spaces are not feasible, the digital environments of casualty recording databases can offer similar benefits. The information supplied by IBC offers closure for families and communities, humanizing the casualties by detailing their names and circumstances, thereby allowing the true gravity of their deaths and the severity of the conflict to be appreciated beyond statistics on the screen (OHCHR, 2022). Inclusion in a database such as IBC, which meticulously documents deaths by cross-referencing information with other sources, empowers those affected to pursue justice for their loved ones. The human security framework underscores the profound impact of conflict on community identities (Hoogensen Gjorv, 2023), further exacerbated by the lack of detailed documentation, thus exemplifying the need for casualty recording.
It is also important to recognize the impact on families and communities when documenting casualties marked as “missing” or about whom nothing is known. Incorporating details surrounding the casualty circumstances, as demonstrated by IBC, provides the chance for further investigation and the hopeful identification of the victims (Hamourtziadou, 2021). Examples of this through the work of IBC are numerous, with age, occupation and location included in an attempt to identify the name of the casualty, as in the example below (Tables 1 and 2).
31 by mortar shells in Al-Tayaran area, south Mosul
| Incident | a6367 |
| Type | mortar shells, roadside bombs, suicide car bombs |
| Deaths recorded | 31 |
| Targeted or hit | residential areas hit, members of three families killed, casualties include women, children, elderly and policemen |
| Place | Al-Tayaran area, south Mosul |
| Date | 27 February 2017 |
Individuals for whom personal or identifying details were reported
| IBC page | Identifying details (number if more than one) | Age | Sex |
|---|---|---|---|
| a6367-nw3485 | Manar, daughter of Safana Hamad | 4 | Female |
| a6367-ke3670 | daughter-in-law of Najihah Abed | Adult | Female |
| a6367-nf3535 | son of Najihah Abed | Adult | Male |
| a6367-ka3500 | granddaughter of Najihah Abed | Child | Female |
Physical monuments to those who died in past conflicts but were never confirmed are also a useful opportunity for their communities to center their grief and begin to heal (Commonwealth War Graves, n.d.), as the historic nature of their disappearance means it is unlikely new information will surface.
It is important to reflect on the counter-arguments against casualty recording, in order to fully evaluate its necessity. For example, breaches of privacy with the disclosure of victims’ identities or sensitive revelations without their consent could be massively damaging or even dangerous. To address this, strict ethical guidelines should be enforced to maintain the privacy of those recorded and recording, utilizing secure data storage, encryption and anonymization where necessary to help safeguard while allowing for the crucial documentation of casualties (Every Casualty, 2020). Navigating these challenges effectively ensures every casualty is respectfully documented and remembered, both digitally and in physical memorials, fostering healing and empowering communities to pursue justice and accountability for their loved ones.
Promoting accountability by evidencing abuses
Documenting the casualties of conflict is also important as it serves as crucial evidence of human rights abuses in criminal proceedings, promoting accountability (Hamourtziadou, 2017). Traditional theories like realism, emphasizing state security as a priority, argue casualties bear minimal relevance to international security, advocating against actions such as apologizing or accepting accountability as it would portray weakness (Antunes & Camisao, 2018). However, viewing these atrocities of conflict through a human security lens allows the discourse to analyze the impact on individuals as well as the state (Gazizullin, 2016), encouraging a new imperative to safeguard their lives and advocate for their rights. For example, data derived from IBC has been referenced in various reports and articles to highlight the human cost of the Iraq War (Cordesman, 2019; European Asylum Support Organisation, 2019) including international organizations such as the UN (UNHCR, 2014). Inclusion of countries involved in the aggression (Dardagan et al., 2023) has contributed to discussions surrounding the impunity of Western States (Wille, 2023) as well as exposing human rights abuses. The widespread reporting of incidents taken from IBC data has made it impossible for state actors to deny the war crimes they committed (IBC, n.d.b; Sito-Sucic & Robinson, 2013), with the explicit acknowledgment of the figures in the UK government’s Iraq Inquiry in 2016 (Chilcot, 2016), representing a small yet official political ambition for future justice measures. Such a rejection of impunity contributes to an absence of lingering resentment, and thus a smoother reconciliation process and an increased sense of justice for the victims.
Prevention of future conflicts
Documenting the casualties of conflict is not only beneficial for those directly affected by its presence, but also for future generations. The enhanced accountability it fosters encourages efforts of reconciliation, thus preserving security by avoiding future conflicts. For example, the impunity enjoyed by the US and the UK over their conduct in the Iraq War has provided numerous obstacles for the victims (Amnesty International, 2023), triggering the continuation of aggressive interactions between those pursuing justice and those capitalizing on their invincibility in the court of international justice (United Nations, 2023b). The data collated through IBC has prompted a variety of projects aiming to bring the impact upon civilians more centrally into the discourse of violent conflict and consider the methods for minimizing the violence toward non-combatants in future conflicts (Sloboda et al., 2013). Building upon this, casualty data has been used in immigration applications in order to prove vulnerability when seeking asylum, protecting individuals by highlighting the dangers they face if they were to return to Iraq. As discussed by Dardagan, Hamourtziadou, and Sloboda in 2023, peacebuilding and reconciliation efforts are made possible only with the accountability of all actors in the conflict, fortified by a truthful and detailed recognition of all casualties.
In contradiction of its own guidelines, human security fails to consider the perilous conditions faced by relief workers pursuing the security of others as a breach of human security principles (Alkire, 2003). Despite its potential for protecting future lives, reports consistently reveal documenting casualties of conflict endangers the researchers (Stoddard et al., 2022; United Nations, 2023a), directly contradicting human security standards which prioritize individual safety. These threats to human life have challenged the necessity of casualty recording at a risk to the researcher. However, it is important to recognize not all those documenting the casualties are in the conflict zone, therefore facing less danger. Additionally, there exist various strategies to mitigate the risks, (Every Casualty, 2020), such as military training, collaboration with local partners who know the area, and employing technological tools for remote data collection. Regardless of the inherent risks, documenting the casualties of conflict is crucial for evidencing potential human rights abuses and, with the appropriate caution, is a necessary practice for understanding its impact, both immediately and for future generations.
Recognition of the broader impacts of armed conflict
Looking through a wider lens, it is important to document casualties as it assists in the recognition of the broader impacts, exposing the true scope of the devastation of armed conflict beyond direct killings. Extending the imperative of casualty recording to recognize these implications allows for the increased understanding of civilians harmed due to neglect, isolation, and the loss of key resources such as healthcare, food and water, accommodation, and other essential human rights (OHCHR, 2022). Data published by IBC, for example, is not limited to “traditional” forms of warfare, revealing fatalities linked to attacks on infrastructure (or the consequential failings due to being in an area of active conflict) during the Iraq War.
For example, the deaths of between 8 and 22 children, the majority from diarrhea, after a water purification system was hit by an airstrike and became contaminated, evidences the critical implications even when attacking non-human targets (Table 3).
8–22 children, nearly all from diarrhea, Baghdad
| Incident | j036-i |
| Type | – |
| Deaths recorded | 8–22 |
| Targeted or hit | water purification system (resulting in diarrhea) |
| Place | Al-Alwiyah Children’s Hospital, Baghdad |
| Date | 4 April 2003–9 April 2003 |
Human security advocates not only for the direct physical protection of individuals, but also for the safeguarding of how they live; access to sanitation, safe community spaces, and stable political leadership are just some of the extended factors which need to be protected during war, as the cost of not doing so can be devastating. Such meticulous documentation will unveil those broader, often-overlooked violations of human rights, a fundamental principle the theory is focused on upholding (Gilder, 2021). While direct war operations may be the most obvious explanation for the majority of casualties, it is also important to document those which transcend conventional measures. The evolution of contemporary conflict strategies designed to cause mass disruption (Atrews, 2020) are no longer limited to individual killings, but instead have the ability to target vital infrastructure, profoundly impacting the lives of all in the vicinity. Recording these instances of casualties borne from conflict-related disruptions allows researchers to gain a more holistic and truthful understanding of the damage caused, leading to better-informed policies and protocols for helping those in need.
Nevertheless, like many humanitarian initiatives, the availability of resources for casualty recording remains limited (Every Casualty, 2020). Adhering to human security principles, it could be argued these resources might be more effectively utilized in direct humanitarian interventions addressing the tangible consequences of conflict on human lives. For realists, resources could be utilized more appropriately elsewhere, for the state’s interests and military. However, this undermines the importance of psychological well-being, alongside the closure and dignity provided to families by the work of casualty recorders (Dardagan & Sloboda, 2016). It also does not account for the significance of casualty data in the promotion of accountability and justice following the conflict (Taylor, 2023). Finally, the presence of casualty recorders facilitates swift assistance, acting as intermediaries between victims and aid organizations (Every Casualty, 2020), and providing crucial details to expedite the deliverance of appropriate, vital resources (Browne, 2021).
Insights to improve immediate action plans and future legislation
Documenting casualties also has implications for immediate action plans and informing future legislation. Information derived from such research can be utilized to direct humanitarian responses toward those in need by identifying areas of vulnerability and recommending the specific services they may require following casualties (Every Casualty, 2020). For example, the Civilian Impact Monitoring Project (CIMP), focusing on casualties and harm to civilians due to armed conflict in Yemen, used its data to prioritize the supply of medical resources to hospitals in a region suspected to be the victim of increased airstrikes (Every Casualty Counts, 2023). As projected by Browne (2021), this sentiment echoes the principles of human security theory, advocating for the restoration of the seven security categories potentially damaged in the conflict, through the accurate and deliberate mobilization of humanitarian aid.
While reactive measures are crucial in the protection of civilians, data shows the number of conflict-related deaths has consistently risen since the early 2000s (Novta & Pugacheva, 2021), highlighting the imperative to also safeguard future victims through effective legislation. For instance, data drawn from the Syrian Network for Human Rights was utilized in 2023 by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) to draft a resolution condemning the country’s violation of IHL and International Human Rights Law (Relief Web, 2023), calling for all involved in the conflict to immediately assist in the delivery of humanitarian assistance. This case is among other examples presented to governments to inform future policy, illustrating the potential of data to identify patterns and prevent their recurrence (Hamourtziadou, 2017; Jewell et al., 2018), thereby evidencing the impact of documentation on the protection of future civilians and de-escalation efforts. Enshrined in human security theory is its commitment to addressing the underlying causes of conflict, thus casualty recording is a beneficial method to uphold the future security of individuals according to this framework.
Maintaining a historical, accurate record
Finally, the ability to maintain an accurate, historical record of the tragedies of war is an important resource for the future. One such record is the Kosovo Memory Book, a comprehensive database documenting almost all of the human losses endured during the conflicts in Kosovo between 1998–2000 (Kruger & Ball, 2014). Such work has been credited to have subdued community disputes and established a degree of mutual trust (Norton-Taylor, 2011), by truthfully conveying the human cost of the conflict on all sides. The transparency fostered by publishing this work removed the possibility that crimes could be denied, and forced an atmosphere of accountability, justice, and remembrance for all included in the book. Preserving the collective memory of conflict is made possible through the use of casualty recording databases, serving as a tool for historical analysis and as a lesson to future generations (Humanitarian Law Centre, 2011).
As consistently demonstrated throughout this essay, the counter-arguments regarding the obstacles of casualty recording must be considered to fully comprehend its’ necessity in conflict. Concerns regarding historical revisionism, suggesting casualty documentation could be subject to selective interpretation, undermine the accuracy and integrity of these records as historical artifacts. Discrepancies between documentation methods, inclusion criteria, definitions and the use of legal frameworks, and the inherent subjectivity in these processes, provide issues for the standardization of procedures and documentation results (Minor, 2012). However, adherence to transparent methodologies, precise statistical techniques and diligent standards of evidence should deter this predicament (UN, 2023a). As suggested by Hamourtziadou (2021), such methods could include: a thorough documentation and consideration of all available sources; verification process and peer review mechanisms to ensure accurate and reliable data is being stored. Moreover, including the work of diverse perspectives from those in the local community, experts, and others, helps to mitigate unintentional bias and ensures a more nuanced understanding of historical events (Every Casualty, 2020).
Updates from the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine
In order to highlight the contemporary relevance of casualty recording, it is important to include the ongoing updates regarding the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Such conflicts demonstrate the urgency to continuously monitor the effects of war, providing recent examples of the impactful presence of casualty recording on policy, legislation, and advocacy. Throughout the conflict, many individuals, charitable organizations and international justice bodies have provided their commentary on events, including the ICJ. The ICJ has condemned Israel’s presence in Palestine, presenting that they are breaking international law through their settlement policies (Beaumont, 2024) and has ordered them to cease their offensive immediately (Al Jazeera, 2024). In view of the humanitarian crisis currently facing those Palestinians in Gaza, the ICJ has issued measures requiring Israel to ensure that aid deliveries not be prevented or delayed, cooperating with the United Nations (UN News, 2024a). This aid is to include food, water, medical supplies, fuel, shelter, clothing, electricity, hygiene, and sanitation assistance. Israel has also been ordered to increase the capacity and availability of land crossings, in accordance with the Genocide Convention, of which they are a signatory (UN News, 2024b). The ICJ require Israel to submit a report outlining its compliance with these measures within one month (UN News, 2024a). Finally, the ICJ has released its’ advisory opinion regarding the potential legal consequences facing Israel, as well as other nations who have aided in this offensive, and the position of the United Nations (ICJ, 2024). The court has found that the actions of Israel in this conflict have breached international law, and they must immediately cease all settlement activity, remove all legislation maintaining and legitimizing their presence in the region and provide full reparations for the damage caused, including restoration of the situation which may have existed had the conflict not occurred. In terms of legal consequences for other nations, the ICJ has determined that all other States must assist the UN in promoting the self-determination of Palestinian people, and ensuring they are able to exercise their human rights. They also must differentiate between Israel’s legal and illegal occupied lands during all dealings with them, refraining from engaging in any economic or trade relations which would support or maintain Israel’s presence in Occupied Palestinian Territory. They are not to aid any illegal settlement activities by Israel, and not to recognize changes to international borders without agreement from all parties involved. Furthermore, states should show their respect for international law by holding Israel accountable for their genocidal actions. The ICJ has advised that it is the responsibility of the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council to decide how to end Israel’s illegal presence in Occupied Palestinian Territory.
These monumental developments in action and legislation are only possible with the publication of casualties in such conflicts. The practice exposes the extent of the damage caused by conflict and demands a resolution and reparations to be made. By documenting as much detail as possible about the lives lost, their number at a minimum, authorities have been able to ascertain exactly what provision is needed and have encouraged the condemnation of Israel by powerful entities such as the International Court of Justice. This is despite Israel’s insistence that the ICJ has no capacity to rule on the issue, as UN resolutions have decreed this be resolved through politics, not legal requirements (Beaumont, 2024). The revelation of the colossal number of casualties in this conflict, documented by casualty recorders, has enabled the ICJ to reject such an argument, countering that the principles of international law apply regardless of failed political efforts of reconciliation in the past. This position asserts their legal power to condemn the actions of Israel and demand a withdrawal of forces.
In conclusion, the imperative to document all casualties of armed conflict cannot be overstated. Beyond statistics, every individual lost to conflict represents a unique life, story and legacy which must be honored. Whether through memorials, the pursuit of accountability or the prevention of future atrocities, casualty recording stands as an essential pillar of humanity amidst the chaos of war, dedicated to safeguarding international principles of human rights. Through the lens of human security, the impact of war on civilians and the benefits afforded to them by casualty recording can be recognized beyond traditional understandings of security. While realist perspectives may disregard the significance of casualty recording, underscoring some of the arguments presented against the practice, (such as the misuse of resources), human security theory reframes the discourse, reaffirming the intrinsic worth of every human life, and stating a commitment to justice for all.