The ethos of 'move fast and break things' doesn't work for humanitarians. If we break things, we break people.

But technology is changing the nature of conflict. International Humanitarian Law cannot evolve to meet these challenges without input from the private tech actors shaping the battlefield.

This week's guest, Philippe Stoll, Senior Techplomacy Delegate at the ICRC, works to connect humanitarians to tech entrepreneurs and other relevant minds over the dilemmas presented by new technologies in conflict.

From biometric systems to the ethical risks of data misuse, Philippe shares how the ICRC is developing cautious, problem-driven tech policies aimed at protecting vulnerable populations. He also discusses his obsession with giving concrete meaning to abstract ideas and how immersive “Digital Dilemmas” installations can help tech developers and humanitarians understand each other's worlds.

Questions about how to handle tech in conflict zones aren't going anywhere. For anyone interested in the future of humanitarianism, this conversation is essential.

In this episode, Tamam Aloudat and Richard Blewett join Lars Peter Nissen to ask the hard questions: What’s worth saving? What needs to go? Who gets to decide?

...And are we the right guys to discuss this?

Tammam argues that tinkering with the system isn’t enough - we need a “non-reformist reform,” a radical reimagining of what humanitarianism even is. Richard reflects on decades of failing attempts to change from the inside and whether this crisis is the moment to go back to the basics of principled humanitarian action, led by local actors, cutting the expensive middlemen.

They wrap up by tackling the question: What is each of us going to do differently in the next few months?

As the sector scrambles, priorities are being set. The decisions being made right now will define the future of humanitarianism. So what comes next? Who will (and should) take the lead?

Listen in. The system is shaking. Let's make sure it doesn’t just settle back into place.

Humanitarian tech initiatives fail when they start with a "shiny object" rather than a defined problem. Solutions are imposed rather than developed based on actual needs. A ‘graveyard of bad tech’ is expanding. Should humanitarians just admit they’re bad with technology?

During the International Red Cross Movement Conference in Geneva in October 2024, Host Lars Peter Nissen found a quiet corner to discuss pitfalls and opportunities in humanitarian tech with Heather Leson (Digital Innovation Lead at the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies) and Omar Abou Samra (Director of the Global Disaster Preparedness Center at the American Red Cross). Heather and Omar believe in technology’s usefulness to the industry, but stress that it must be integrated into humanitarian work with the same rigor applied to non-digital interventions.

This conversation is a call for better co-design between humanitarians and technologists to ensure impact measurement goes beyond vanity metrics like downloads. Heather and Omar pitch an approach similar to venture capital, where ineffective projects are shut down rather than endlessly sustained, and where human-centered design and cross-disciplinary collaboration are embraced. They discuss the secret sauce for better humanitarian tech, and that maybe it's time humanitarians to rethink their role—not as central actors, but as collaborators in a larger system.