Royal Army College

Lesson Overview

Lesson 02 named impartiality as one of the three principles of peacekeeping. This lesson takes it up in depth, because impartiality sits at the heart of the protection of civilians. It is essential: the protection of all threatened civilians depends on it. It is also demanding, because being genuinely even-handed is harder than it sounds, especially once your sympathies are engaged.

Impartiality is easily misunderstood, so the lesson teaches it carefully. It does not mean indifference to right and wrong, or treating aggressor and victim as morally equivalent. It means applying the force's protective duty even-handedly to all civilians, whatever group they belong to. So impartiality is fully compatible with protecting a victim from an aggressor: it concerns even-handedness toward all civilians, not indifference to who threatens whom.

By the end you will be able to explain impartiality and distinguish it from indifference to right and wrong; explain why it is essential to the protection of all civilians; explain why it is demanding and what erodes it; explain how it is maintained; and protect all who are threatened even-handedly while still protecting the threatened from those who threaten them.

Key Terms

Impartiality: the even-handed application of the force's protective duty to all threatened civilians, without favouring one group over another.
The protection of all: the protection of every threatened civilian regardless of group, which impartiality makes possible and partiality undermines.
Indifference to right and wrong: treating aggressor and victim as morally equivalent. Impartiality is not this.
Protecting the victim from the aggressor: shielding a threatened civilian from one who threatens them; fully compatible with impartiality.
The pressures on impartiality: the forces that erode it, chiefly engaged sympathies and the pull to favour one side.
The protector of all: a soldier or force that, through genuine impartiality, protects every threatened civilian even-handedly.

What impartiality is, and what it is not

Impartiality, in the protection of civilians, is the even-handed treatment of all civilians: the force extends its protective duty to everyone who is threatened, whatever group they belong to, favouring none.

What it is not is indifference to right and wrong. It does not mean treating aggressor and victim as morally equivalent, nor refusing to protect a victim because that would amount to taking a side. That misreading is dangerous, because it would stop the force from protecting the threatened, which is the whole point.

Hold the distinction clearly. Impartiality is even-handedness toward all civilians; it is not blindness to the difference between a threatened civilian and the person threatening them. That is why protecting a victim from an aggressor is not a breach of impartiality but precisely what impartiality requires: the force would protect any threatened civilian from any aggressor, regardless of group. Understood rightly, impartiality enables the protection of the threatened; understood as indifference, it would forbid it.

Why impartiality is essential to the protection of all

The protection of civilians means protecting all the vulnerable people threatened in a crisis or breakdown of order, and that depends on impartiality. An impartial force protects everyone threatened, regardless of group. A partial force protects those it favours and abandons the rest. Only the first is a protection of all; the second protects some and fails others.

The civilians a partial force abandons are the very people the protection of civilians exists to serve. So a soldier who means to protect all the threatened must be impartial; partiality leaves some unprotected.

Impartiality is also essential to the force's standing, as Lesson 02 taught. A partial force loses the trust and consent of those it does not favour, who come to see it as their opponent's instrument. It then loses the standing it needs to protect anyone, even those it favoured. An impartial force is trusted by all and can protect all. So a soldier must be impartial on two counts: to protect all the threatened, and to keep the force's standing.

   IMPARTIALITY AND THE PROTECTION OF ALL

   WHAT IT IS: even-handed protection of ALL threatened civilians,
   regardless of group; favour none, abandon none.
   WHAT IT IS NOT: indifference to RIGHT and WRONG / treating
   aggressor and victim as equivalent.
   -> FULLY COMPATIBLE with protecting the VICTIM from the AGGRESSOR
      (protect whoever is threatened, from whoever threatens them,
      regardless of group).

   WHY ESSENTIAL:
   - only an IMPARTIAL force protects ALL the threatened; a PARTIAL
     force protects some and ABANDONS others (the very people PoC
     exists to protect)
   - only an impartial force is TRUSTED BY ALL -> keeps its standing
     (Lesson 02); a partial force is seen as the opponent's instrument

   IT IS DEMANDING: sympathies get engaged; there is a pull to
   FAVOUR one side. MAINTAIN it by holding to the protective duty
   to ALL and resisting the pull to favour.

The demanding nature of impartiality

Impartiality sounds simple. In practice it is demanding, because real pressures pull a soldier toward partiality.

The strongest is engaged sympathies. In conflict or breakdown of order, you may be drawn to one side, perhaps because that group seems more wronged, or more like you. That sympathy tempts you to protect its civilians more readily than another group's, which is partiality. A second pressure is the broader pull to take a side: your comrades' sympathies, the prevailing narrative, the plain human tendency to back one party in a fight.

These pressures are real and strong, so remaining impartial takes deliberate discipline. The lesson is honest about this because a soldier who does not expect the pull can drift into partiality without noticing it.

The difficulty is greatest where your sympathies are most engaged, where one group seems clearly more wronged. But that is exactly where impartiality matters most and most distinguishes a true protector. Being even-handed when you feel nothing either way is easy and untested; being even-handed when you are pulled hard toward one side is genuine impartiality. The next section sets out how it is maintained.

Maintaining impartiality, and the protector of all

Impartiality is held against the pressures by a discipline with two parts.

The first is holding to the protective duty to all. Keep firmly before you your duty to protect every threatened civilian even-handedly, so that the duty governs your conduct rather than the pull to favour. The duty is the fixed standard against which you recognise and resist that pull.

The second is resisting the pull to favour. Be aware of your own engaged sympathies, name the pressure they exert, and deliberately maintain even-handed protection against it, rather than being eroded unawares.

A soldier who applies this discipline stays a true protector of all the threatened. One who does not is worn into partiality and fails the protection of all. The protector of all is what the protection of civilians requires: through genuine impartiality, held against the pressures, they protect every threatened civilian even-handedly, while still protecting the threatened from those who threaten them.

That is the lesson in full. Impartiality is the even-handed protection of all civilians, not indifference to right and wrong, and fully compatible with protecting the victim from the aggressor. It is essential, both to the protection of all and to the force's standing. It is demanding, because engaged sympathies and the pull to favour are real, above all where sympathies run highest. And it is maintained by holding to the protective duty to all and resisting the pull to favour.

In Practice: Protecting All Even-Handedly

A soldier of the Royal Kaharagian Army is protecting civilians where order has broken down and several groups are present. They understand impartiality rightly: they extend protection to every threatened civilian, whatever group they belong to, and they protect any one of them from anyone who threatens them, never indifferent to who is threatening whom.

Then their sympathies engage. One group seems clearly more wronged, and they feel the pull to protect its people more readily than the others'. They recognise the pull and resist it, holding to their duty to protect all the threatened even-handedly. This is hardest precisely here, where their sympathies are strongest, and that is exactly where it counts.

Contrast a soldier who lets that sympathy win, shielding the favoured group while neglecting another. They abandon the very people the protection of civilians exists to serve, and they cost the force its standing among those they failed. The soldier who stays even-handed against the pull is a true protector of all: trusted by everyone, able to protect everyone.

Check Your Understanding

Explain what impartiality is and what it is not. Why is it fully compatible with protecting a victim from an aggressor, and why would the wrong reading of impartiality as indifference prevent the protection of the threatened?
Why is impartiality essential to the protection of all civilians, and why does a partial force protect some and fail others? Why are the people it fails the very ones the protection of civilians exists to serve, and why is impartiality also essential to the force's standing?
What makes impartiality demanding, and which pressures erode it? Why is it most demanding where your sympathies are most engaged, and how is it maintained?

Reflection (write a short paragraph): Impartiality is hardest exactly where your sympathies are most engaged, where one group seems clearly more wronged. Genuine impartiality is protecting all even-handedly even then. Be honest with yourself about whether you could hold to even-handedness when you were pulled hard toward one side; most people find it easy with no stake and very hard once they care. Consider why holding impartiality there is what makes you a true protector of all, while giving way abandons the civilians you do not favour. Then describe one way you could build the discipline of even-handedness for the moment your sympathies are engaged.

Summary

Impartiality is the even-handed application of the force's protective duty to all threatened civilians, favouring none. It is not indifference to right and wrong, so it is fully compatible with protecting a victim from an aggressor: protect whoever is threatened, from whoever threatens them, regardless of group. Read as indifference, it would forbid the very protection that is the point.
It is essential to the protection of all, because only an impartial force protects everyone threatened, while a partial force abandons those it does not favour, the very people the protection of civilians exists to serve. It is also essential to the force's standing (Lesson 02): a partial force loses the trust of those it fails and is seen as the opponent's instrument, while an impartial force is trusted by all and can protect all.
It is demanding. Engaged sympathies and the broader pull to take a side are real and strong, and a soldier who does not expect them can drift into partiality unawares. It is hardest where sympathies run highest, which is exactly where it matters most and distinguishes a true protector.
It is maintained by discipline: holding to the protective duty to all, so that duty governs over the pull to favour, and consciously resisting that pull rather than being worn down by it.
The soldier who maintains genuine impartiality is a true protector of all the threatened, even-handed regardless of group while still protecting the threatened from those who threaten them. This deepens the impartiality principle of Lesson 02, applies the duty to protect all of Lesson 01, draws on the even-handed service taught in the College's humanitarian courses, and is completed by the minimum use of force (Lesson 04) and the protector's discipline (Lesson 08).

Impartiality and the Protection of All