The IMRF joined experts in Geneva to discuss the legal, operational, and technological challenges of protecting victims of maritime incidents at sea during armed conflict, as part of its work to strengthen global maritime SAR.

Maritime search and rescue (SAR) operations in and around conflict zones are treacherous and demanding. The unforgiving nature of the ocean can be as perilous as the adversary itself. SAR teams must operate under extreme conditions that tests their capabilities and their equipment, pushes their skills and resolve to their limit and continuously raises questions about the value of humanitarian SAR in times of conflict.

Bringing together panellists with backgrounds in legal, policy and operational SAR. The event, titled Navigating Humanity: Legal, Operational, and Technological Challenges in Maritime SAR During Armed Conflict, forms part of ongoing work between the IMRF and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) examining the impact of armed conflict on maritime operations. The discussion explored how to strengthen protection for victims of maritime incidents, and SAR personnel responding to them, and how States and maritime stakeholders can better implement legal obligations in practice.

In that vein, Roly McKie, the IMRF’s IMO Representative and SAR Advisor, brought operational SAR expertise to discussions on protecting life at sea within conflict zones. The panel was moderated by Bruno Demeyere, Editor in Chief of the International Review of the Red Cross, while Dr Anna Petrig, Professor of International Law at the University of Basel, and Commander Maritime, Dr Suzanna Razali Chan (Rtd), formerly of the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency, joined Roly on the panel.

 

Focusing on frameworks

Anna opened the discussion by outlining the legal framework governing protection at sea. She noted that the current frameworks may be outdated and limited, with many treaties dating back to the 1800s, while the main modern framework is the Second Geneva Convention of 1949. She noted that Article 18 of this Convention requires parties in a conflict to “take all possible measures to search for and collect persons protected by the Second Convention who are shipwrecked, wounded, sick or dead as a result of the hostilities”. Anna emphasised that the idea of “all possible measures” is central today, especially when conditions make rescue very difficult.

She also highlighted that the beneficiaries of these protections have expanded over time. While the original framework focused on military personnel, additional protocol now extends the protection to civilians. Responsibilities for SAR may extend beyond armed forces to civilian authorities, merchant vessels, private actors and neutral States. For example, Article 21 of the Second Geneva Convention allows parties to appeal to neutral merchant ships for help, giving them special protection while conducting rescues. Efforts to update and clarify these legal frameworks are ongoing, including revising the San Remo Manual, first published in 1994 as a key guide to customary law.

 

The impact on the global SAR system

Roly then led a discussion focused on the operational side of maritime SAR, starting with an overview of how the global SAR system is organised and functions in practice. The world’s oceans are divided into SAR regions, with each coastal State responsible for coordinating responses in its designated area through Rescue Coordination Centres (RCCs). During peacetime, SAR operations follow a structured process that includes distress alerting, communication with survivors and responding vessels, information gathering and analysis, locating and detecting persons in distress, recovery operations with on scene coordination, medical care including telemedicine advice, and final delivery to a place of safety. RCCs may dispatch rescue boats, helicopters and aircraft, and call upon passing merchant ships in accordance with UNCLOS Article 98 and SOLAS Regulation 33.

Roly explained that modern SAR systems are heavily dependent on technology, with radios, satellite communications, global navigation satellite systems, Automatic Identification Systems (AIS), radar and shore-based telecommunications all playing essential roles. This technological dependence creates critical vulnerabilities in situations of armed conflict. Jamming and spoofing can disable signals, interfere with radar, and block satellite communications. Additionally, cyber-attacks can compromise RCCs IT systems and shore-based infrastructure. If satellite and radio communications are disrupted, coordination between survivors, vessels and rescue centres may become impossible. In these scenarios, rescue units could be forced to revert to traditional navigation techniques using sextants, paper charts and taking compass bearings, making navigational calculations based on estimating tidal current, leeway, and distance and speed achieved, significantly reducing speed of response and precision of the SAR process.

He also described the challenges in identification. The Geneva Convention only mentions that SAR craft may be marked with the Red Cross, Red Crescent or Red Crystal, which may not be clear in poor weather or in low visibility. Modern vessel identification includes electronic devices and systems such as AIS, which provides valuable vessel information during normal operations, but if it becomes jammed or disabled, distinguishing vessels becomes difficult. In worst cases, radar jamming can cause rescue craft to disappear completely from tracking and identification systems.

Furthermore, RCCs themselves are a point of vulnerability, relying on critical landlines, radio systems, satellite connectivity and cyber resilient infrastructure. If any of these systems fail, coordination can collapse. Roly also raised the issue of personnel protection and how SAR services often rely on civilian volunteers. If areas of land are compromised, come under threat from weapons, are captured or control of them shifts, questions may arise about whether those volunteers can continue operating.

When considering possible solutions, Roly referred to the idea of preserving certain radio channels exclusively for humanitarian SAR use. He stressed the importance of planning, resilient communications equipment, protected infrastructure, and clear procedures. Technology has greatly enhanced SAR capability, but it has also increased chances of disruption. Ensuring continuity of rescue services requires preparation and recognition that confusion and mistakes are possible in any conflict environment.

 

Offshore support

Suzanna then highlighted the important role that the oil and gas industry can play in maritime emergency response. Offshore installations are often located close to major sea routes and may be positioned many miles from shore. Because they operate continuously and maintain advanced monitoring systems, they can detect distress situations early and act as first responders. Oil and gas fleets often include rescue vessels, equipped with dynamic positioning systems, advanced communications and heavy lifting equipment.

She explained that crews in this sector undergo rigorous safety and emergency training, including firefighting, first aid, survival techniques and evacuation procedures. Offshore facilities operate around the clock, tracking vessel movements and weather conditions, and can provide temporary shelter, medical services and logistical support for large numbers of rescued persons. Helicopter networks used for crew changes and logistics can also support medical evacuation and expand the reach of SAR operations. Suzanna emphasised the importance of clearly defined contingency plans, joint exercises with national SAR agencies, investing in flexible rescue equipment and real-time data sharing to better use industry resources in SAR operations.

The discussion concluded with a shared recognition that the sea remains unforgiving, regardless of geopolitical circumstances. Legal clarity, operational preparedness and technological resilience are all essential to ensure that all persons are protected and that SAR services can continue to function in the most complex environments. For the IMRF, the event reinforced the importance of safeguarding SAR vessels, aircraft, infrastructure and personnel, and of strengthening cooperation with partners such as the ICRC to uphold humanitarian principles at sea.

 

IMRF’s Tabletop Exercises

To further the discussion and gain a deeper understanding of the practical applications to support the protection of life at sea, the ICRC and IMRF convened a tabletop discussion in Geneva on this subject on 13 February, where three specific scenarios were discussed. Read the write up on this tabletop exercise. 

If you missed the panel discussion, it can now be watched here.