Why does the Geneva Convention forbid medics from carrying any more than the most basic of self-defense weapons?

Question

Why does the Geneva Convention forbid medics from carrying any more than the most basic of self-defense weapons?

In: 10147

Answer 1

Part of the privilege that comes with enjoying protection under the Geneva Convention means sacrificing the right to exploit such privelege for military advantage.

The whole purpose of the Geneva Convention is to define and codify the line between ethically acceptable and unacceptable behaviour so as to minimize unnecessary human suffering caused by war.

A medic’s role is to save life and reduce human suffering. Humans on both sides benefit when medics can perform their duties with decreased risk of being targeted by the enemy.

Every participant on the battlefield has a right to self-defence.

But allowing medics to contribute to offensive operations while enjoying protection from attack is unsportsmanlike. Sportsmanship is a good way to frame principles in the Geneva Convention to gain a sense of how its drafters approached battlefield ethics. Without basic respect for dignity and integrity, human beings are nothing more than savage animals. When such creatures are armed and fight on behalf of nations, we call them “war criminals.”

Edit: since my original post doesn’t explicitly say so, the point is to be able to identify when people commit unethical actions during war so that justifiable legal action may follow after the fact.