Les camps de réfugiés et la guerre : Du sanctuaire à l'enfermement humanitaire ?
Refugee and IDP camps, intended to protect civilians affected by conflicts and natural disasters, have an undeniable strategic importance, and their management can be critical for the resolution of crises.
During the Cold War, camps - often located on the border between two states in conflict with each other - made ideal grounds for recruitment, resupply and propaganda. The strategic function of refugee camps has evolved in the past twenty years: although they still play a part in the prolongation of conflicts, they shelter fewer refugees and play a less prominent military role. While they used to be administered by guerillas, camps are now managed by humanitarian organizations - a change that raises a number of issues as regards their judicial and social responsibility for the organization and supplying of war economies.
This paper is published in French only: Les camps de réfugiés et la guerre : Du sanctuaire à l'enfermement humanitaire ?
Author(s)
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
Stability under Pressure. A Pakistani View on Nuclear Deterrence after Pahalgam
The May 2025 India-Pakistan crisis after the Pahalgam attack has generated a familiar but incomplete debate: did nuclear deterrence work, or did it merely allow both sides to fight a limited war under the nuclear shadow? The better answer is that deterrence worked at the level at which it was designed to work. It prevented a general war and an uncontrolled vertical escalation, and kept nuclear weapons in the background. But it did not prevent India from attempting to carve out space for conventional action, nor did it prevent Pakistan from responding conventionally to restore deterrence credibility.
Strategic Shift in NATO’s Support for Ukraine. A Study of NSATU and PURL Initiatives
French Forward Deterrence: What Is in It for the Baltic States?
For what may be its most significant stress test since the end of the Cold War, European deterrence is under strain. Russia’s war against Ukraine has demonstrated Moscow’s willingness to use force and its ability to combine conventional operations with nuclear signalling, coercive rhetoric, and hybrid actions. At the same time, the gradual deterioration of transatlantic relations has revived concerns about the reliability of extended deterrence.
Europe at the Crossroads of DefTech: Rethinking the European Defense Innovation Ecosystem
“The way I look at Iron Dome is as the ultimate manifestation of the future of the United States’ role in future conflicts, which is not to be the world police, but to be the world gun store,” said Palmer Luckey in November 2023. Luckey is the founder of Anduril, one of the most prominent DefTech companies. The ambition is clear: to participate in global rearmament by capitalizing on the quality of American innovations and to dominate the arms market—at least in the West—through technological mastery.