In 2025, violence against children in armed conflict remained at unprecedented levels, with the United Nations verifying 38,558 grave violations against 24,174 children, the highest number recorded since the beginning of its monitoring mandate (United Nations, 2026). Of these, 6,607 children were verified as recruited or used by armed forces or armed groups, while others were killed or maimed, subjected to sexual violence, abducted, or denied humanitarian access (United Nations, 2026). Children were recruited or used by armed forces and armed groups in several conflict situations monitored by the United Nations, including the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, and other conflict-affected settings. Their roles extend beyond combat to include fighters, cooks, porters, spies, and messengers, exposing them to exploitation and abuse. These patterns demonstrate the continuing failure to protect children from armed conflict.
A child forced to carry a weapon is a weaponized tool in an adult’s war. But unlike any conventional weapon, these children bleed, dream, and remember. The scars outlast any ceasefire. No peace agreement signed while children remain armed can ever be called just or durable.
Why Children Are Recruited
Children enter armed groups through multiple pathways. Most are abducted, threatened, or manipulated. Research on Sierra Leone’s civil war highlights that “economic deprivation, social instability, and political pressure coerce children into armed groups, often lacking genuine consent” (Elkhaili & Sempijja, 2025). Others join out of poverty, seeking income for their families. Some are driven by revenge. Armed groups also view children as “expendable and easily replaceable if harmed or lost,” and they “fulfil diverse roles within these groups, from combatants to domestic workers, spies, and even spouses or concubines” (Elkhaili & Sempijja, 2025).
Armed groups deliberately force children to commit atrocities to stigmatize them, and escaping and returning home seem impossible. The violence is not incidental; it is instrumental. By forcing a child to kill, armed groups ensure the child will be rejected by their own community, severing the bonds of family and belonging that might otherwise enable escape. This is a calculated strategy of control, one of the most insidious forms of psychological warfare.
The Victim and Perpetrator
One of the most complex challenges is the dual status of child soldiers as both victims and perpetrators. Children forced to commit human rights violations carry a psychological burden that can last a lifetime. The UN Security Council Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict has stressed the importance of treating children associated with armed groups “primarily as victims,” emphasizing that detention “should be considered only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest possible period of time” (Security Council Working Group, 2024).
The international legal framework, including the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, prohibits compulsory recruitment under 18. But law alone cannot protect a child when a gun is placed in their hands. The Paris Principles (2011) guide the treatment of children associated with armed forces or armed groups, emphasizing their status as victims first (Elkhaili & Sempijja, 2025; Security Council Working Group, 2024).
The Scars Are Deep
The psychological damage inflicted on child soldiers is profound. Reintegration is impeded by psychological trauma, cultural stigma, and community rejection. Families and communities, themselves coping with war’s trauma, often struggle to understand or accept returning children.
The case of Afghanistan is a cautionary tale. After the 2021 Taliban takeover, child protection programs built over decades were dismantled in weeks. In Yemen, despite commitments to stop using child soldiers, the practice persists because there are no consequences for violators.
The Architecture of Reintegration and Peace
Nonetheless, there is hope. The evidence from successful reintegration programs demonstrates that children can heal and become agents of peace.
In Sierra Leone, where the civil war was once called the children’s war, UNICEF and partners helped former child soldiers return to school and receive skills training. The Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration (DDR) program in Sierra Leone “is often cited as a successful case study of post-conflict recovery” (Elkhaili & Sempijja, 2025). Organizations like Don Bosco Fambul, established in 1998 to rehabilitate and reintegrate child soldiers, have become national leaders in child protection, operating the largest interim care and therapeutic centers for abused children in Sierra Leone (SDB.ORG, 2025). The organization provides psychosocial support, education, skills training, and family reunification services (Don Bosco Fambul, n.d.; Salesian Missions, n.d.).
In Northern Uganda, the Acholi traditional reconciliation ceremony Mato Oput—meaning “drinking the bitter root”—has been adapted to reintegrate formerly abducted children. The ritual involves a symbolic cleansing ceremony that allows children to return to their communities with dignity. The story of “Kidega,” a former child soldier who undergoes Mato Oput, illustrates how traditional rituals can facilitate forgiveness and reconciliation (Walusimbi, 2012).
In Colombia, Indigenous children and children of African descent have been disproportionately affected by grave violations (United Nations, 2024). The peace process with the FARC included provisions for the release of children from armed groups, treating them as victims first. The Security Council Working Group has called for reintegration programs that are “gender- and age-sensitive and inclusive for children with disabilities” (Security Council Working Group, 2024).
In 2024, 16,482 children formerly associated with armed forces or groups were provided with protection or reintegration support in countries on the children and armed conflict agenda (United Nations, 2025, p. 2). Virginia Gamba, the UN Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, stated that every child released should be seen as a survivor and as an agent of change, capable of helping build lasting peace in their community and country (United Nations, 2025).
A Path Forward
The international community must commit to absolute standards:
First, guarantee that peace agreements specifically include child soldiers. No peace deal is complete without provisions for release, reintegration, and protection. The Security Council has urged parties to “include child protection issues in peace negotiations and agreements” (Security Council Working Group, 2024, para. 14).
Second, direct flexible, sustainable funding to community-based reintegration programs. The UN has called for “sustainable child protection capacities in conflict and post-conflict settings” (United Nations, 2025, p. 3).
Third, strengthen monitoring and accountability. The UN Security Council has repeatedly emphasized the need for robust monitoring and reporting mechanisms (Security Council Working Group, 2024). Violators must face sanctions, arms embargoes, and prosecution. The 2024 report shows that while non-State armed groups were responsible for almost 50% of grave violations, government forces were the main perpetrators of killing and maiming, attacks on schools and hospitals, and denial of humanitarian access (United Nations, 2025, p. 2).
Fourth, resist the political backlash against child protection. The international community must defend these programs as a matter of fundamental human rights.
Fifth, treat the prohibition as absolute. There is no exception. No compromise. Every child in an armed group is a violation of international law. Children’s future—and ours—depends on how we choose to see them.
Keywords: Sierra Leone, Colombia, peace, children, armed, disarmed, disarmament, conflict, conflict resolution, Uganda, Somalia, Afghanistan, peacebuilding, peace deal, ceasefire, child, demobilization, reintegration, ddr
Abubakari Najimu is a deputy registrar at Tamale Technical University, Ghana, and a PhD student in Public Law at the University of Venda, South Africa, with interdisciplinary academic training in law, management, human resource strategy, business planning, and development studies. He holds an MSc in management and human resource strategy from Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, as well as postgraduate and undergraduate degrees from the University for Development Studies, Ghana, and a Master's in Labour Law and Practice from the University of Ghana, Ghana. This interdisciplinary background, law, human resource strategy, development studies, and labour rights, combines to produce research interests in conflict prevention, institutional accountability, and inclusive development. He focuses his research on employment and labour law, particularly workplace justice, labour rights, and public regulation. Beyondhis academic work, he has extensive professional experience in university governance and administration at Tamale Technical University, where he has served in several roles supporting academic planning, accreditation, quality assurance, and faculty administration. His broader research interests include public law, employment relations, governance, and the legal and policy dimensions of social protection, conflict prevention, and inclusive development in Africa. He is particularly interested in how legal and institutional reforms can promote fairness, stability, and social justice.
