This event examined legal, social and political mechanisms that protect children and families in the course of international and domestic armed conflicts. The need for such a conference has been made salient by the recent conflicts in the Middle-East and other world regions in which children were injured and killed and families suffered.

The importance of studying the impact of political conflict on children and families and of preventing that impact arises from a number of empirically-based factors. First, armed conflicts are unfortunately a part of life in many parts of the world and are not likely to disappear soon. Second, children are among the most vulnerable people in any conflict, since they are not fully developed individuals. Third, families play a central role in the socialization of children so that damage to the structure and function of a family will add considerably to the suffering of the children. Fourth, developmental research shows that the risks and traumas experienced in childhood may be long-lasting and lead to poor developmental outcomes. Finally, there is evidence that exposure to armed conflict may lead to a perpetuation of the trauma and conflict across generation.

Children are affected by political violence, not only in their experiencing of it but in the potential for this experience to affect the rest of their lives. While international legal safeguards for children exist, and there has been extensive research on the effects of exposure to political violence, the topic of protection of children in conflict has not received adequate research attention, and actual protection efforts have been weak and inconsistent. There is too little thinking about protecting children and families in one’s own society, and even less on protecting those on the “other side”.

The conference engaged researchers, policy makers and child advocates from the fields of international law, the social sciences and medicine, who presented and exchanged ideas on the prevention of adverse effects on children and families as a result of armed conflict. It also created a dialogue between researchers and professionals who deal with children’s rights directly.

From the different conference presentations we can resume the following findings, relevant theory and implications.

I. Psychological effects of armed conflict and consequences of exposure to political violence

• Exposure to violence leads to higher levels of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) for Jewish-Israeli, Arab-Palestinian Israeli and Palestinian children and adolescents,
• Coping mechanisms are different for Arab and Jewish adolescents (research of Prof. Sagy and Dr. Braun-Levensohn)
• Exposure to political violence contributes to an increase in aggression (Prof. Landau and Ms. Dvir-Gvirsman, et al.) and lower well-being among Israelis and Palestinians

II. Child soldiers

• A community systems approach in Israel and Turkey and
• an opportunity to express fears in the presence of trusted figures (e.g., teachers) can help children exposed to trauma to recover relatively quickly from exposure to trauma. (Prof. Laor and Mr. Wollmer).
• Transitional justice for child victims of child soldiering in Africa, including re-acceptance into the community may help rehabilitate former child soldiers (Ms. Williamson).
• Female-headed families who are victimized by war–related violence are in special need of aid from outside sources (Ms. Gaston and Dr. Wright)

IV. Institutional perspectives

• Detention of children is widely used and is a potential source of trauma for children (Prof. Hamilton).
• Independent human rights institutions for children have great potential for protection of the rights of children during armed conflict (Ms. Linnarson and Ms. Sedletzki).
• The International Criminal Court may provide an avenue for justice for the most vulnerable victims of justice (Ms. Hamzei)

V. Protection of children and families: Local perspectives

• While there are many human rights organizations that defend Palestinian children, the exposure to violence does not appear to diminish (Dr. Golan).
• Such organizations are important factors in the protection of children.
• Enhancing the functioning of parents may contribute to the well-being of children exposed to political violence (Prof. Lahad).

VI. Philosophical Issues in child protection

• Transparency and morality in both means and ends are important both in military operations and in programs for the protection of children (Dr. Ronen).

In conclusion we can point out several problems and implications.

It is obvious that conflicts will not go away soon. Local and international institutions, including NGOs and legal structures have had successes and have great potential for child protection. But there is a gap between international law, country law adoption and implementation.

Moreover, prevention is not widely adopted nor well understood.

Several psychological theories have been developed in relation to prevention:

The Ecological theory of Urie Bronfenbrenner, according to which people grow up in ecological systems: e.g., families, schools, communities. Development is enhanced when the systems are coordinated.

The Risk-resilience theory (elaborated by Rutter, Sameroff or Luthar for example): Exposure to environmental risk such as political violence may lead to maladaptive development. Individuals that are “immune” or those that have corrective experiences (e.g., intervention, mentor, and partner) may recover and even become strengthened.

The following prevention concepts are been developed:

Each nation is required to protect the opponent’s population as well as one’s own. It is important to plan prevention before the first strike. The priority of preventive protection is above all else, first towards one’s own population:

• Evacuation
• Shelter protection
• Access to protective devices

The prevention prescriptions towards the opponent population are:

• Soldier training of own forces, including simulated exercises of moral dilemmas.
• Soldier, officer and political accountability.
• Prioritizing the saving of lives above hitting non-threatening targets.
• Use of non-lethal weapons, especially in demonstrations.
• Peace education.
• Avoiding the play-station mentality.
• Activating robots to respect human life and welfare.
• Activating ourselves to respect human life and welfare.
• Finding the right context for cooperation in prevention.

Through the formulation of concrete proposals to all warring states and parties, the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung and the Minerva Center for Human Rights hope to enhance discussions and develop well-defined measures that will help reduce the impact of armed conflict on children and their families.