Dennis Rodgers is a social anthropologist by training, with a BA and a PhD from the University of Cambridge, as well as a postgraduate degree from the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland. He is a Senior Research Fellow in the Brooks World Poverty Institute (BWPI), at the University of Manchester, UK, where he leads their research programme on ‘Urban Poverty and Conflict’,1 and a Visiting Senior Fellow with the London School of Economics Crisis States Research Centre, where he is involved in their research on ‘Cities and Fragile States’.2 He was also a member of a Nicaraguan youth gang for a year.

A number of states are faced with the challenge of ensuring the harmonious development of rapidly expanding cities and of offering a growing population public services worthy of the name in the fields of security, health, and education. That challenge is even more difficult and more pressing because violence may erupt (hunger riots, clashes between territorial gangs or ethnic communities, acts of xenophobic violence directed against migrants, and so on) – violence that does not generally escalate to the point of becoming an armed conflict but that is murderous nevertheless.

On the basis of the experience of the International Committee of the Red Cross and of its partners, as well as reports by academic specialists, this article describes the vulnerability of the poorest and of migrants in urban areas. It presents the difficulties with which humanitarian organizations, which are often accustomed to working in rural areas, have to contend. Lastly, it describes innovative responses, from which much can be learned: income-generating micro-projects, aid in the form of cash or vouchers, urban agriculture, and the establishment of violence-prevention or health-promotion programmes to protect those affected by armed violence in disadvantaged areas.

More than one billion people nowadays live as slum-dwellers in informal settlements characterized by vulnerability and poverty. The ‘normal’ situation in slums can, in several ways, be classified as a ‘crisis’, and violence levels often contribute to situations akin to ‘armed conflict’. The plight of these people should be the concern of humanitarian organizations, which should consequently widen their spectrum and address vulnerability to disasters and to violence as mutually reinforcing. Applying the ‘human security’ framework and ‘livelihoods’ approach can enable them to take a proactive role. However, particularly for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, a greater involvement also poses several challenges.

Gangs have long been considered a source of violence and insecurity, but they are increasingly identified as a cause of instability and a threat to the state. Yet gangs operate mainly in non-conflict settings, raising questions about whether applying a conflict lens to understand gangs is appropriate. Marked differences appear between armed groups and gangs when considering concepts of ungoverned spaces, the state, violence, and sustainability. Few gangs reach the threshold of posing a direct challenge to the state; this makes comparisons with other armed groups difficult and suggests the need for a more specific analytical lens.

Territorial gangs are among today's main perpetrators of urban violence, affecting the lives of millions of other people. They try to gain control of a territory in which they then oversee all criminal activities and/or ‘protect’ the people.

Such gangs are found to differing degrees on every continent, although those given the most media attention operate in Central America. The violence that they cause has a major impact on the population in general and on their members' families, as well as on the members themselves.

Humanitarian organizations may find themselves having to deal with territorial gangs in the course of their ‘normal’ activities in a gang's area, but also when the humanitarian needs per se of people controlled by a gang justify action.

This article looks at some courses of action that may be taken by humanitarian agencies in an environment of this nature: dialogue with the gangs (including how to create a degree of trust), education, services, and dialogue on fundamental issues. Such action only makes sense over the medium to long term; it may have a very positive impact but only allows the symptoms of a deep-seated problem to be treated.

Organized crime and gang violence are global phenomena that often emerge in urban areas. Although they are not new, states only recently began to perceive them as serious threats to public security. Laws specifically designed to combat them have consequently been enacted. This article outlines the difficulties of dealing adequately in legal terms with these phenomena and analyses the different approaches adopted so far at the national and international level.

Armies have traditionally avoided cities and siege operations. Fighting for and in cities is costly, slow, and often inconclusive. But sometimes they are unavoidable, either because they are located on main road or rail junctions or because of their value as political and/or economic prizes. Urban expansion in both north and south has made cities today the main theatres of military and humanitarian operations.

Armies' structures, equipment, and doctrines are undergoing a process of adaptation. Manoeuvre has given way to fire power and protection for the troops as the decisive elements of military power. While heavy fire power does considerable damage and causes civilians to flee their homes, operations using protection techniques are only suitable for stabilization. Moreover, their success depends essentially on the willingness of troops to make sacrifices, and on support from the public.

Law enforcement is not a task usually undertaken by military forces, at least within domestic legal contexts. Conversely, maintaining or restoring security within dysfunctional or ‘post-conflict’ areas of operation is a role commonly undertaken by them. Within these latter operations, the skill sets and highly calibrated application of force that are commonly associated with police forces in their law enforcement role are in fact manifested in a decisively military context. This article reviews the experiences and legal frameworks associated with military participation in two separate types of mission, namely UN-sponsored peace operations and unilateral/multilateral stabilization and counter-insurgency operations. It argues that these contexts have demanded a revised interpretative approach to the applicable law, one that is much more sensitive to social and political effect.

A survey of contemporary armed conflicts indicates that major military powers are increasingly facing militarily weaker adversaries and being drawn into unconventional engagements in cities, towns, and villages. Given the asymmetry of military capabilities in such conflicts, it is submitted that higher standards of reasonableness be imposed upon military commanders of major military powers to ensure constant care for civilian populations, and furthermore that civilian populations be spared more effectively from the effects of urban warfare by applying customary law ab initio, in order to avoid gaps in protection that may arise from the premature classification of armed conflicts.

On 27 April 1994, all South Africans were permitted to vote for the first time, signalling the birth of a democratic state built on a constitutional democracy. Yet the wrath of gang-related activities in townships and other urban areas was clearly visible, as was the xenophobic violence that shocked the world. Very often the vast majority of victims have been innocent civilians, and especially women and children. This article gives an overview of the various forms of violence in South Africa and also briefly considers the state's responses to them within the various legal frameworks.