The protection of medical services in armed conflict is generally framed under the principle of medical neutrality. That respect for this principle has had a chequered past would be an understatement, that violations of medical neutrality continue to this day obvious to most observers. Rather than attempting to explain why this is the case, this paper offers a comparative analysis as to how a historian’s toolbox can be employed to better understand contemporary attacks on healthcare. A broad historical overview of medical neutrality will be provided, while remaining cognizant of the challenges of juxtaposing different epochs, before delving into methodological suggestions. Throughout the paper the author draws on his experience both as an analyst with MSF and a historian to provide concrete illustrations, both historical and recent. Finally gaps and suggestions for future research will be highlighted.
This paper is a preprint version of a chapter published in “Challenging Medical Neutrality: Healthcare ethics in armed conflict and other complex settings”, accessible here.
