United States of America

2015: Attended the state consultations on the SSD in Geneva – led by Norway.

March 2017: Attended Buenos Aires Conference on Safe Schools. Made a strong statement against the Guidelines. May 2017: Human Rights Watch (Mika) published an op ed calling on the US to endorse the Declaration.

September 2017 UNSC: GCPEA sent a letter to the ambassador in New York asking to raise the issue on attacks and military use and to endorse the Declaration during the Open Debate on children and armed conflict.

January 2018: Scientific American (the oldest continuously published monthly magazine in the United States) has issued an editorial calling on all states to endorse the Safe Schools Declaration: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-call-to-make-schools-safe-zones-not-war-zones/ February 2018: indication received from UK contact in New York that the CAAC focal point is interested in working on the Declaration.

February 2018: GCPEA provided background on the United States to Human Rights Watch (Zama) ahead of a call with the New York Mission; Zama had the phone call. The expert was excited to bring it up but skeptical that it would go further. She never got back to her but Jo saw her later and it had not gotten traction.

March 2018: During the informal on Resolution A/HRC/37/L.33, USA has opposed references to the Declaration in operative and preambular paragraphs.

July 2018: Co-sponsored resolution 2427 (2018).

August 2018: HRW (Jo) had a chat with a consultant who is working with Save the Children USA to think through how it might engage the US government on children and armed conflict issues as part of the broader CAC campaign Save is planning. I pushed Safe Schools among other topics. The CAAC expert is TaShawna Smith. She’s very supportive, and at a Save-convened meeting a few months ago, she appealed to other governments to do high level advocacy with Nikki Haley. But it may not be a realistic lift.

October 2018: UN WPS open debate advocacy in New York: Gisela met with the WPS expert, a Political Advisor, who told US played a role in securing language on military use in resolution A/RES/72/284 on counterterrorism, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in June 2018. The US had first attempted to insert language on human shields at the request of Israel. However, Switzerland intervened to encourage them to use language that draws on IHL. The language had slipped though when the resolution was adopted by consensus. Gisela mentioned how the US had inserted language on military use in the 2017 UNGA omnibus resolution on strengthening of the coordination of emergency humanitarian assistance of the United Nations. He recalled, and noted that that resolution had gone to a vote, while the counterterrorism one had been adopted by consensus. The language in the counterterrorism resolution is: OP33. Condemns the failure to take all feasible precautions to protect the civilian population and civilian objects against the effects of attacks when using civilian objects, in particular schools and hospitals, for military purposes such as launching attacks and storing weapons, and strongly condemns the use of civilians to shield military objectives from attacks; He was interested by examples of implementation, and the endorsements by France and the United Kingdom. He suggested following up in Geneva. Regarding the open debate, he said would endeavour to refer to the issue in the draft of the statement for the open debate that they send to capital, but that it would be completely rewritten.

November 2018: USA blocked the reference to the SSD in the final UNGA rights of the child resolution.

January 2019: Steven Haines had several discussions with US officials through the US Mission in Geneva, including a link up from there with people in both the Pentagon and State. He agrees that it is best not to expend energy trying to persuade the US Government to endorse – it would go against normal US practice and most unlikely, especially under the current Administration. an educational programme of persuasion to comply with th SSD and the Guidelines makes eminent sense.

February 2019: GCPEA met with the Attorney-Advisor and provided an update on recent developments and the Spain conference. He was interested in examples of implementation in Sudan, Somalia, and Nigeria. He also asked about engagement with non-state armed groups. Follow-up: GCPEA followed up in writing, sharing a letter for the Secretary of State. The expert responded that he would send the information to his colleagues in Washington.

April 2019: Save the Children US are exploring ways to incorporate the Safe Schools Declaration into the review of the US doctrine and training as it relates to Protection of Civilians and Women, Peace, and Security. The US military is updating the guidance and has expressed an interest in expanding the understanding and awareness of Children and Armed Conflict. Save the Children US conducted advocacy during the negotiations of the House Resolution 277, which includes strong language on protection from attack and military use of schools. Save the Children US is continuing efforts to garner support for the resolution in the House, and is working to secure the introduction of a similar measure in the Senate. While the resolution does not mention the Safe Schools Declaration specifically, it reinforces many of the Declaration’s commitments

March 2020: During the consultions on the GA Res on International Day to Protect Education for Attack: Recognizing the importance of ensuring inclusive and 12 years of equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all (PP6). The Safe School Declaration (SSD) PP7. Egypt, Iran, Algeria, Russia and Indonesia opposed including reference to the SSD. The argument was that the SSD is not a UN negotiated process, and should hence go. The US stated that while it is not a signatory to the SSD, it should stay since it does not impose any action on member states, it is only a factual para. Violence against girls when going to, from and while in school PP11. Russia wanted PP11 to be deleted, as it relates to violence on girls (related to violence when going to and from and while in school) and did not see the relevance of this under the current resolution. The EU, UK, US and Mexico wanted to keep the language, however. Reference to UNICEF in relation to CAAC and inclusion of the 6 grave violations PP14. PP14 regarding reference to the work by the SRSG CAAC. The US does not want reference to the six grave violations, as these are not necessarily violations of IHL, to which the UK and Indonesia disagreed.

February 2020: At the UN launched the practical guidance for mediators to protect children in situations of armed conflict, Ambassador Norman-Chalet (United States of America) expressed deep concern about the fact that at least 600,000 children in the Anglophone region of Cameroon have not been able to safely attend schools for more than three years.

March 2020: Save the Children U.S. advocated for the inclusion of protections for schools in a set of recommendations from NGOs community directed at U.S. military leaders as the Pentagon is planning to develop a policy on civilian harm in U.S. military operations and security partnerships. As a result, recommendation under “Minimizing and Mitigating Harm across Military Options” urges the Department of Defence to “take steps to more systematically integrate into operations and targeting decisions accurate analysis of civilian pattern of life, segments of society that are particularly vulnerable, as well as the presence of civilian objects critical to civilian life, including but not limited to medical care and educational facilities.”

May 2020: The US made a statement on the GA Resolution for the International Day, urging all parties to armed conflict to comply with their obligations regarding schools and to avoid all unlawful uses of schools for military purposes.

Oct 2020: GCPEA provided inputs to Save the Children USA on a draft bill “to help protect schools, universities and other educational settings in conflict-affected areas from attacks and use by armed groups, and to ensure all children and youth in conflict contexts have access to safe, quality education”. The draft bill focuses on what the State Department and USAID can be doing with a focus around accountability and programming.

In 2019, the US Senate passed a resolution related to protecting education in conflict settings, which builds on language from the Safe Schools Declaration. The resolution calls on the United States government to monitor attacks on education, to support prevention measures and response mechanisms in places where attacks on education occur and ensure that marginalized children, especially girls, have access to safe and quality education, and to hold accountable all parties responsible for attacks on schools. Save the Children US supported the development of the new Senate resolution, and built congressional support for developing a bill in 2020.

November 2020: Joint press statement by the diplomatic missions of Australia, Canada, EU, NATO, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Turkey, UK and US in Kabul condemning the abhorrent attacks on education centres in #Afghanistan

June 2021: GCPEA met with the US mission in New York (including the policy advisor to the Ambassador) and desk officers. They highlighted that they will not undermine the Declaration in negotiated documents and other processes. The Ambassador wants to take a more formidable stance on children and armed conflict and the policy reasons are clear to endorse. They see the endorsement as a good win for the administration. They agreed that under the current administration, it is timely to reflect on their position, however they still anticipate legal pushback from the MoD. We would need to convince a small set of folks who have high power and sway. They are huge supporters of the ICRC but not signatories of all the conventions and protocols. They would not want to be lumped with China, Russia and Hungary on non-endorsement. While they will have an internal conversation with the DoD, they strongly encouraged a Chatham House Rules legal IHL related discussion on the Declaration with GCPEA legal experts. The Mission will set up this conversation. On the CAAC report the US calls for a transparent process on the listing process. They are one of the biggest donors on the CAAC agenda. They are focused on the gendered aspect of CAAC. With a human rights mindset their policies are changing (citing Yemen). Zama, Yatasha and Beverly met with Mr. Ngoyi, Anushree Banerjee and Sohini Chatterjee from the US Mission in NY. We made a strong case for their endorsement and highlighted that the UK, France and Canada have changed their position on the Declaration since its launch. The endorsement by the US would be a constructive next step. We also encouraged their participation at the Abuja Conference and informed them of the UK statement during the CAAC debate (where the UK emphasized that the Declaration complements IHL and IHRL). We also provided examples of good practice and the commitments by endorsing states at the global level (state-led implementation network and the international training). Way Forward: GCPEA will provide a briefing document, including IHL issues and implementation of the Declaration. The Mission will set up an in-person conversation with the DoD and GCPEA IHL experts would need to travel to DC. The US will also speak with UK MoD. The Mission confirmed support to work with GCPEA on the issue (they have already had discussions with Niger and Estonia).

August 2022: On August 25, the Department of Defense released the much-awaited Civilian Harm Mitigation Response Action Plan (CHMR-AP). While highly technical and contingent upon successful implementation, the CHMR-AP is a comprehensive plan with concrete, time-bound next steps. It is extensively focused on what the DoD is calling harm to the “civilian environment,” which includes “the civilian population and the personnel, organizations, resources, infrastructure, essential services, and systems on which civilian life depends.” This represents a significant move to address harm beyond immediate civilian casualties following U.S. military action. The CHMR-AP is designed to improve the protection of civilian objects (like schools), ensure better analysis of civilian patterns of life and how they shift in conflict contexts, and implement civilian harm mitigation across DoD strategy, doctrine, plans, professional military education, training, and exercises. SCUS has been engaged with DoD through InterAction as part of this process, working to ensure enhanced consideration of civilian objects, and the ways in which military action can exacerbate humanitarian needs. The CHMR-AP is an important step.

December 2021: Somewhat positive statement at the Arria formula meeting on the protection of education during armed conflict hosted by Norway and Niger in follow up to UNSCR 2601. “The rise in attacks on schools by armed actors is increasing, with distressing effects on the ability of young children in conflict areas to access necessary education.”; “These setbacks only underscore the need for a renewed and robust commitment to protect children in armed conflict situations around the globe.”; “President Biden has made clear that access to education in areas of conflict, especially for girls, is an integral component of U.S. foreign policy. This is embodied by the launch of the National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality, which identifies ten unique priorities to ensure women and girls have safe access to resources, including education. The United States, like many others, is also committed to the Sustainable Development Goals, including SDG 4 and its Target 4A, which addresses the need for safe, non-violent, inclusive, and effective learning environments for all.”

November 2022: Endorsed the Political Declaration on Strengthening the Protection of Civilians from the Humanitarian Consequences Arising from the Use of Explosive Weapons in Populated Areas (EWIPA) on 18 November during an International Conference hosted by Ireland, the leader and penholder behind the Declaration.

November 2022: HRW had a good meeting with 4 folks from State Dept. They are looking to broaden their work on CAAC issues. HRW raised the fact that the US has not endorsed the SSD and asked if there had been any recent discussion on this in Washington. The answer seemed to be no, but Dan (our main CAAC focal point) promised to take it back. This is a good time to re-engage, particularly since the US is thinking about putting together a high-level event in 2023 around CAAC at the GA high-level week. Getting them to endorse ahead of time could be a good hook.

January 2023: On 17 January, Nevena and Apolline met with Daniel Mc Nicholas, Counsellor humanitarian affairs, Jon Shonerd, Humanitarian Program Specialist, Humanitarian Affairs, and Charlie Trumbull, Deputy Legal Advisor at the US PM in Geneva. The deputy legal adviser asked about examples of military vacating schools they had been occupying following endorsement of the SSD, and was also interested in knowing if we had evidence of the US military already complying, or not, with the principles of the Guidelines. He agreed that the recently adopted Protection of Civilians action plan (august 2022) by the DoD showed positive interest in the administration to engage more on this topic. They did not commit to anything and share little on their position, however overall, a positive meeting considering previous engagement with them.

March 2024: On 23 March, Lisa, Apolline and Ilaria had a virtual meeting with Mr. Daniel Ohlstein, Senior Advisor on CAAC for the Department of State of the USA, based in Washington. He explained that the US was hoping to sign the SSD last year but had to pause given the events in October. He is optimistic that they could sign on this year. He explained that the US’ current policies already go beyond what is required in the SSD and that legal concerns seem to have been addressed (I explained that we can put them in touch with the ICRC for legal reading of the Guidelines if helpful). He explained that the NATO Florence Conference had given renewed interest on the topic (Apolline met with the person from the US who attended the Conference and discussed with her their positions and remaining obstacles to endorsement). The NATO CAAC policy is also an incentive for them to join the SSD. We discussed strategic moments for them to announce endorsement in 2024-2025: EWIPA Conference in Aprill, launch of EuA24 or the UNSC CAAC debate in June, NATO Washington Summit in July, Int’ Day to Protect Education from Attack in September, or the Fifth International Conference on SSD/ SSD tenth-year anniversary in 2025. Next steps: we agreed it would be strategic to have an in-person meeting in Washington with Lisa. We will organise this in the coming weeks.