Gamers and the Geneva ConventionThe Red Cross wants video games to incorporate the Geneva Convention
Approximately 600 million video-gamers worldwide may be violating the laws of war – at least virtually. For the past two years, a unit of the ICRC has been working on discouraging video game creators from allowing players to disregard the rules of war – that is, disregard the rules of war while playing a video game, not in real life — without consequences. ICRC calls for gamers to be “rewarded for respecting the law of armed conflict and there should be virtual penalties for serious violations of the law of armed conflict, in other words war crimes.”
Approximately 600 million video-gamers worldwide may be violating the laws of war – at least virtually.
The 31st International Conference of the Red Cross (ICRC) met in November 2011 in Geneva with the objective of strengthening international humanitarian law and humanitarian action. During the conference, the ICRC explored the relationship – or, rather, the relationship that should exist — between the rules of war and video games. The result of the informal debate at the conference was an initiative to incorporate the rules of the Geneva Convention into military themed video games.
The Conversation reports that for the past two years, a unit of the ICRC has been working on discouraging video game creators from allowing players to disregard the rules of war – that is, disregard the rules of war while playing a video game, not in real life — without consequences. Some military style video games already take the laws of war into account, but the ICRC is concerned that many more video game do not, and that these games contain scenarios and plots which encourage the trivialization of serious violations of the laws of war.
The ICRC believes that military style video games have an effect on what young people, future recruits, and societies in general perceive as acceptable or unacceptable in war situations.
The ICRC video game page calls for gamers to be “rewarded for respecting the law of armed conflict and there should be virtual penalties for serious violations of the law of armed conflict, in other words war crimes.”
The ICRC goes on to say that “This already exists in several conflict simulation games. Game scenarios should not reward players for actions that in real life would be considered war crimes.The ICRC is concerned that certain game scenarios could lead to a trivialization of serious violations of the law of armed conflict. The fear is that eventually such illegal acts will be perceived as acceptable behavior.”
The ICRC is concerned particularly with scenarios which depict the use of torture, particularly in interrogation, deliberate attacks on civilians, the killing of prisoners or the wounded, attacks on medical personnel, facilities, and transport such as ambulances, or killing of soldiers who have surrendered. The ICRC says it does not advocate for sanitizing video games of such scenarios. It notes that violations occur on real battlefields and can, therefore, be included in video games. Rather, the ICRC believes it is useful for players to learn about what is acceptable and what is prohibited in war through rewards and punishments incorporated into the game.
