Undergraduate Law Review at Florida State University

An Examination of the United Nations’ Effectiveness in Supporting Disabled Persons in Conflicts

—

by

Undergraduate Law Review at FSU
in

Writer: Gabbi McAlonan-Serrano

Article Editor: Emily Lash

Associate Editors: Alaina Babb & Leona Rindle

I. Introduction

In armed conflicts, both civilians and military personnel are often at risk. Often forgotten, however, are persons with disabilities. In 2019, the United Nations Security Council developed Resolution 2475,1 which aimed to address the needs of disabled persons in armed conflicts. The resolution contains multiple provisions that outline measures states should take to protect and support persons with disabilities before, during, and after conflicts occur. The provisions build on the UN’s 2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), a foundational text in outlining the rights of persons with disabilities under International Humanitarian Law. Additionally, Security Council resolutions may provide the basis for enforcement measures, including sanctions, peacekeeping action, or, in some circumstances, the authorization of force.

Since 2019, there have been two major conflicts within the jurisdiction of the United Nations. One is between Russia and Ukraine, the other between Israel and Palestine. The number of protections for disabled persons in conflict zones, like Russia, Ukraine, Israel, and Palestine, has increased in the past two decades.2 However, the implementation of those protections has been ineffective, causing armed conflicts to continue to disproportionately impact disabled persons.3 The UN Security Council’s Resolution 2475 is an example of a legal measure that, in practice, has often been ineffective. To ensure states act ethically before, during, and after conflict, and to ensure the protection of disabled persons in war, it is imperative that those with disabilities are protected under international humanitarian law and that those laws are enforced by the United Nations.4 Upon enforcing the measures and protections outlined in Resolution 2475, it becomes possible to expand on effective protections for disabled persons in conflict zones.

II. Russo-Ukrainian War

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine began in February 2022. Following Russian attacks on Ukraine, specifically Russia’s annexation of Ukrainian territory,5 the UN condemned Russia’s actions as illegal and demanded that the country withdraw all troops from the territory in 2022.6 The UN did so by passing Resolution ES-11/7. Russia has not done so, and the war has continued into the present day despite UN resolutions, like ES-11/7,7 demanding that the invasion stop. 

Like ES-11/7, Russia also ignored the UN Security Council’s Resolution 2475, which outlines protections for persons with disabilities in times of conflict. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues to damage the infrastructure of the country,8 which unreasonably affects disabled persons, leaving them with nowhere to go. Because disabled persons have more needs than able-bodied civilians,9 they are more vulnerable to changes in housing, electricity, and other necessities. This is a violation of provision five in Resolution 2475.10

In addition to Russia, Ukraine has failed to adhere to the protections outlined in Resolution 2475. One of the most at-risk populations in Ukraine, orphans with disabilities, have been unduly affected by the war. Orphanages are short-staffed, and the children are subsequently not receiving proper care and assistance, unlike institutions for able-bodied children.11 This not only violates provisions four and five of Resolution 2475,12 but it also violates Article Seven13 and Article Twenty-Five14 of the CRPD.15 Points four and five of Resolution 2475 have been violated in Ukraine because of the failure of officials to provide essential medical treatment.16

III. Israel-Palestine

The ongoing conflict in Israel and Palestine began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas, a militant group in control of Palestine, launched an attack on Israel. Since then, Israeli forces and certain UN member states have violated point three of Resolution 2475 and Article Eleven17 of the UN CRPD. Provision three of Resolution 247518 calls upon states involved in armed conflicts to “allow and facilitate safe, timely and unimpeded humanitarian access to all people in need of assistance.” Article Eleven19 of the CRPD states that all parties should take “necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including situations of armed conflict.” In repeatedly using excessive force on civilians, Israeli forces have increased the number of people in Gaza with disabilities.20 Because aid is often inaccessible in Gaza, disabled persons are left to survive on their own. Further, because members of the United Nations have failed to support newly and formerly disabled persons in Gaza, they are in violation of Article Eleven21 of the CRPD and provision three of Resolution 2475.22 

IV. Conclusion

The United Nations has failed in upholding and enforcing points made in Resolution 247523 and the CRPD. While both serve as landmark pieces of legislation in international humanitarian law, member states repeatedly fail to provide aid to and protect those with disabilities in conflict zones. With respect to Ukraine and Palestine, Resolution 247524 has failed, and continues to fail, those it aimed to protect because the UN has done little to hold its members accountable when they violate the provisions of Res. 247525 and the CRPD.26 The UN must use its abilities to put sanctions on countries that do not comply, or, if necessary, authorize military action to enforce the provisions of Res. 2475,27 protect disadvantaged civilians, and ultimately to reaffirm its ability to keep member states accountable when they commit injustices. In doing so, the organization can expand on more effective protections for disabled persons in conflict zones.

  1. S.C. Res. 2475, U.N. Doc. S/RES/2475 (June 2019). ↩︎
  2. Brian Dooley & Maya Fernandez-Powell, Nowhere to Go: Internally Displaced People with Disabilities in Ukraine (Hum. Rts. First 2025). ↩︎
  3. Kyra Coates, The Impact of Armed Conflict on People with Disabilities, Ctr. for People with Disabilities (Sept. 2024), https://www.cpwd.org/blog/the-impact-of-armed-conflict-on-people-with-disabilities (on file with the Undergraduate Law Review). ↩︎
  4. Bogna Ruminowicz, Advancing Towards Inclusive Peace and Security: Persons with Disabilities and Security Council Resolution 2475, 105 Int’l Rev. Red Cross 449 (2022). ↩︎
  5. Press Release, U.N. Gen. Assembly, With 143 Votes in Favour, 5 Against, General Assembly Adopts Resolution Condemning Russian Federation’s Annexation of Four Eastern Ukraine Regions, U.N. Press Release GA/12458 (Oct. 2022). ↩︎
  6. Press Release, U.N. Gen. Assembly, General Assembly Overwhelmingly Adopts Resolution Demanding Russian Federation Immediately End Illegal Use of Force in Ukraine, Withdraw All Troops, U.N. Press Release GA/12407 (Mar. 2, 2022). ↩︎
  7. G.A. Res. ES-11/7, U.N. Doc. A/RES/ES-11/7 (Feb. 25, 2025) (ES-11/7 formally condemned the Russian invasion into Ukraine and demanded that Russia end the war. It also called for Russia to be held accountable for its violations of international and humanitarian law). ↩︎
  8.  Dooley & Fernandez-Powell, supra note 2. ↩︎
  9. Id. ↩︎
  10. S.C. Res. 2475, ¶ 5 (“encourages Member States to take appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities have access on an equal basis with others to basic services provided in the context of armed conflict”). ↩︎
  11.  Eric Rosenthal et al., Left Behind in the War: Dangers Facing Children with Disabilities in Ukraine’s Orphanages (2022). ↩︎
  12. S.C. Res. 2475, ¶ 4 (“providing sustainable, timely, appropriate, inclusive and accessible assistance to civilians with disabilities affected by armed conflict”). ↩︎
  13. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities art. 7, Dec. 13, 2006, 2515 U.N.T.S. 3 (Article Seven states, “In all actions concerning children with disabilities, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration”). ↩︎
  14. Id. art. 25. ↩︎
  15. Rosenthal et al., supra note 11. ↩︎
  16. Id. ↩︎
  17. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, supra note 13. ↩︎
  18. S.C. Res. 2475, supra note 1. ↩︎
  19. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, supra note 13. ↩︎
  20. Percentage of Persons with Disabilities in Gaza Has Increased because of Excessive Use of Force by Israel, State of Palestine Tells Committee on Rights of Persons with Disabilities, U.N. Hum. Rts. Off. of the High Comm’r (Aug. 2025), https://www.ohchr.org/en/meeting-summaries/2025/08/percentage-persons-disabilities-gaza-has-increased-because-excessive-use (on file with the Undergraduate Law Review at FSU). ↩︎
  21.  Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, supra note 13. ↩︎
  22. S.C. Res. 2475, supra note 1. ↩︎
  23. Id. ↩︎
  24. Id. ↩︎
  25. Id. ↩︎
  26. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, supra note 13. ↩︎
  27. S.C. Res. 2475, supra note 1. ↩︎

Comments

Leave a comment