Human Security Centre Human Rights and International Security Research
By Sam Biden – Junior Fellow
5 December, 2024
This year marks the highest peak of recorded conflict-induced displacement (CID/s) in recent history, reaching a staggering 123m people. Internally displaced persons (IDPs) are individuals forced to flee their homes but remain within their country’s borders. Their protections lay with their own government, not that of the international community or neighbouring states as is the situation with refugees. This overreliance strains the already fragile relationship governments have with their fearful citizens, resulting in many IDPs facing greater challenges than those of refugees.
Africa serves as the most severely affected region for displacement with states such as Sudan, DRC and Nigeria being plagued by violent non-state armed groups (NSAGs) and state clashes. Sudan experienced intense CID throughout last year, totalling 9.1m people overall with 6m identified movements as the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) clashed with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) at the end of April. The DRC saw 3.7m movements last year as Congolese forces continue to clash with various NSAGs, continuing to foster what’s been described as one of the worst humanitarian crises in history. Between the two, they accounted for nearly half of worldwide movements that year. Burkina Faso continued to see high levels of displacement, resulting in a 61% increase in movements since 2022, rising to 707,000, the sharpest rise since 2019. Chad and Niger saw record CID as well, reaching an all-time high of 118,000 movements, mostly due to the territorial conflict surrounding Lake Chad basin in central Chad, with Niger rising to 181,000, the highest figure in almost a decade. Neighbouring Cameroon saw 164,000 movements as the territorial control of NSAGs in both the north west and south west regions continued to rise, reaching a total of 2.2m IDPs in the state.
The Middle East saw a huge rise in CID, totalling 15.3m movements, the highest in 15 years and an 18% increase since 2023. Due to the Palestinian escalation on October 7, 4.1m movements were tracked from both Palestine and Israel, with the Gaza Strip being the focal point for displacement, totalling 3.4m movements. Collectively, the escalation caused an eightfold increase in movements compared to 2022, vastly higher than the 6,200 movements recorded from January-October 6, 2023. Syria has seen positive improvements since 2020 with a decreasing trend of CID despite a net increase from 2022-2023. Various small conflicts between NSAGs and governmental forces resulted in small shifts in north west Syria with 8,200 movements, yet were overshadowed by a colossal 79,000 movements elsewhere as the result of incidents including a drone strike which struck a military graduation ceremony in Homs. Iraq saw similar declining trends with 21,000 movements, the lowest figure in a decade. Despite this, 98% of Iraq’s IDPs originate from protracted conflicts since 2014 with poor livelihoods and damaged critical infrastructure hindering their opportunities for reintegration.
Asia continues to be a hotspot for displacement with the continual persecution of the Rohingya people in Myanmar, solidifying eastern Asia as the 2nd highest region for displacement. Myanmar alone accounted for 1.3m or 90% of all movements in 2023 and had a three-fold increase since 2021 with the Philippines, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea accounting for the remaining 200,000 movements. The rapid rise in movements is mostly attributed to an NSAG-led coalition operating in Shan state, having clashed with Burmese forces late last November. As a result, 670,000 of 1.3m total movements in Myanmar happened within 8 weeks, levelling off at the tail end of December last year.
The Americas saw concentrated increases in CID in Haiti, Mexico and Columbia. Gang violence in Haiti remains a pivotal issue in the region, causing 245,000 movements since the surge in violence surrounding its capital, Port-au Prince. While vigilante groups are successfully operating without the aid of the Haitian government, the capital has 80% of its territory controlled by gangs, only fuelling displacement. A more positive trend can be seen in Columbia, despite the state being associated with dangerous levels of displacement due to NSAGs, cartels and other various criminal enterprises. However this association is successfully mitigated by a cease-fire between key groups in the state, mainly governmental forces and the National Liberation Army, allowing for a net decrease of movements last year, falling from 339,000 to 293,000 with a 33% reduction in hostilities between governmental forces and NSAGs.
The Russia-Ukraine conflict remains central for European CID as it surpasses its 1,000th day. A dramatic improvement has been seen since the initial invasion in 2022, falling from 17.1m to 779,000 with 3.7m Ukrainian IDPs. Ukraine recorded a total of 714,000 movements last year with 319,000 returnees from other states returning to displacement, primarily in Kharkiv and Dniprop. Russia recorded significantly less movements at 60,000 yet this figure is a significant increase over the initial 7,100 reported movements in 2022. Almost all Russian movements occurred due to cross-border shelling in the region of Belgorod Oblast to which government established IDP camps were formed.
IDPs and Refugee protections
While refugees and IDPs tend to have similar motivating factors such as CID, poor livelihood and natural disasters, they have differing protections regarding their status. Refugees are legally entitled to state aid under whatever jurisdiction they’re under while IDPs remain under the effective control of their own state. In practice, IDPs in states where the government is either persecuting them or complacent in their persecution by NSAGs or criminal enterprises results in them effectively having no rights at all, despite being legally entitled to protection and assistance. For example, Myanmar is riddled with government corruption, persecution and joint violence by NSAGs. While many of the Rohingya people have fled to safer regions of Myanmar, their legal protections as IDPs fall into the hands of those persecuting them in the first place.
Displacement also manifests differently according to the timeframe of conflict. More spontaneous events that cause displacement don’t often result in permanent displacement to another region but a temporary shift on IDPs locations. As a result, when motivating factors are eventually mitigated, many will return to their hometowns and cities where the conflict originated. However, they often aren’t returning to the same standard of livelihood they left initially, their homes, schools and hospitals may likely be destroyed alongside the deaths of family members who stayed behind. This contrast leads some to believe that living as an IDP in exile is more secure than protracted displacement. However, IDP camps and safe zones can be far from secure, causing further displacement.
IDP safe zones & insecurity
While refugee camps in third party states come with their own risks of exploitation, trafficking, violence and insecurity, IDP safe zones and camps are entirely more vulnerable. IDP camps can offer great protection for those fleeing conflict, however, many of these areas are still subject to conflict within the state itself. It’s ideal to situate these camps far beyond the conflict zones, however not every IDP can reasonably travel some hundreds of miles to the more protected option. As a result, states with high levels of CID see their camps attacked by NSAGs. In DRC, both the Rwandan Defence Forces (RDF) and armed group ‘M23’ were responsible for a series of attacks on an IDP camp in eastern DRC, causing 9 deaths and 33 injuries. The camp itself was situated away from the conflict initially, yet spillover from the more unstable regions forced the conflict to move east towards many of the safe camps. A second camp attack in DRC left 45 people dead, including 23 children, further resulting in over 800 shelters being burned down.
Basic living conditions remain an issue in many IDP camps. One report on camps in Syria showed similarly poor and dangerous living conditions between conflict zones and IDP camps in the north west. They look at 1,414 camps with 1.74m IDPs, with many of the camps being established by IDPs themselves as state-level support by the Syrian government is lacklustre at best. Ultimately, two types of camps were established: planned camps and informal camps created by IDPs themselves, with the latter accounting for 90% of the displaced population in camps. Planned camps typically had better access to humanitarian aid yet were still not adequately supplied by the UN, Syrian government or other aid organizations. This official support was not replicated for IDP established camps, often lacking communications with major aid organizations. Even with UN agencies advocating for a greater humanitarian aid for both kinds of camps, disputes surrounding funding and military operations between the Syrian government and Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham caused major delays to any agreements.
All IDPs interviewed reported poor living conditions in both groups of camps with 62% reporting they lived in tents only. A camp manager echoed many of the issues IDPs face with these tents, particularly with insulation as they don’t protect IDPs from either the heat or cold, causing many to feel unwell in these conditions. This style of living dramatically impacts the habitability of these camps more broadly during the harsh winter seasons. Floods, snowstorms and unpredictable weather cause many of the camps to become uninhabitable, affecting an estimated 250,000 IDPs. In total, 939 tents were destroyed with a further 9,583 being seriously damaged, yet replacements were hard to come by. A winterization response plan that focuses on preparing camps for winter is operational but not entirely efficient, focusing on fire-responses, road repairs, providing insulating aid such as blankets and medication for winter-related illnesses. While poor living conditions remain a pressing issue, access to water, sanitation and hygiene services (WaSH) are consistent, but unsustainable. The UN and partnered humanitarian aid organizations successfully deliver WaSH services to 86% of IDPs in displacement camps, primarily through water trucks that travel across the region. This main form of delivery is not without drawbacks as humanitarian workers claim this model is unsustainable long term and heavily relies on deliveries being timely with a reported 15% of displacement camps receiving fresh water via a local source inputted by a humanitarian aid organization.
Resettlement and reintegration
Unlike external resettlement schemes that refugees qualify for under the Refugee Convention, the return of IDPs to their relevant regions within their own state poses unique challenges. They are not entitled to the same protections refugees are when it comes to resettlement, such as protection against torturous or inhumane human rights violations that directly result from resettlement itself. For example, a 1995 forced resettlement scheme in Rwanda resulted in IDPs being forced to their respective regions despite there being major security threats in the present at the time. As a result, a potential 8,000 people were killed during the process.
Protections for the resettlement and reintegration of IDPs formally known as the Angolan Norms on the Resettlement of Displaced Populations (ANRDP), must be met. First, legal safety through the enforcement of provisions designed for their own protection. This has a broad application and includes anything from providing legal aid and support to the passing of IDP protective legislation or creation of law enforcement agencies designed to help facilitate the safe return of IDPs. Most important however are the legal protections against ill-treatment upon their return, something that must be guaranteed through state legislation or procedure due to the non-application of the principle of non-refoulement refugees are entitled to. This legal protection should be met with dignity and the restoration or fulfilment of and rights IDPs are entitled to, be it social, political or economic. This is due to the negative view some hold of IDPs, especially in urban environments. After years of local and national support urban IDPs receive in their new environments, many hold a stigmatic opinion as they view them as simply relocated and not displaced anymore, despite their regional origin still being affected by conflict. This issue is recognized by the ANRDPs with calls for non-discrimination during resettlement, often happening through voluntary and informed consultations.
Second, physical security during the transportation, resettlement and reintegration phase must be guaranteed by the state. In general, the presence of UN field staff creates a greater degree of trust between IDPs and whatever state actor is aiding them in resettlement. One example is that of returnees in Tajikistan from 1993-96. Returnees felt they were more capable of bringing up human rights concerns regarding their treatment with the presence of UN field staff. There also needs to be a focus on protracted displacement after the end of a conflict. A lack of information, damage to civil infrastructure or lack of opportunity can remain a concern even after volatility has lessened. One such solution is the framework provided by the Regional Housing Programme (RHP) designed to resettle and reintegrate IDPs from the former Yugoslavia. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia, and led to the provision of housing and resettlement aid for 36,000 IDPs. The programme is in line with the ANRDPs requirement for adequate infrastructure and access to essential services. The programme itself focuses on these requirements, particularly with the construction of living accommodation and the providing of social welfare, allowing many previously displaced families to reintegrate with better housing and life opportunities than had been offered to them previously.
Conclusion
The global crisis of CID underscores a dire need for systemic, unified responses that prioritize both immediate relief and long-term solutions. From the fragile living conditions in IDP camps to the persistent lack of comprehensive legal and physical security during resettlement, the challenges IDPs face are exacerbated by the absence of robust international frameworks tailored to ensuring states meet their unique needs. Resolving this crisis requires more than humanitarian aid or ad hoc solutions; it demands a reimagining of international cooperation and responsibility-sharing. Mechanisms like the ANRDP and the Regional Housing Programme offer glimpses of what effective reintegration can achieve when dignity and security are prioritized. However, without political will and sustained funding, these initiatives risk becoming isolated successes rather than expandable solutions.
Image: Villagers fleeing gunfire in a camp for internally displaced persons during the 2008 Nord-Kivu war (Source: Julien Harneis via CC BY-SA 2.0)
