transformation, autonomous weapons, climate change, the race to innovate, and so on – devoting an entire issue of the Review to the concept of memory may seem out of place. But memory is an essential part of this debate for more than one reason. First, if conflict victims are to gain any relief from their trauma, the psychological impact of their experience can no longer be overlooked. Traumatic memories cause severe suffering among survivors of violence, those who have been uprooted, and the families of people who remain missing long after a conflict has ended. Humanitarian organizations are increasingly aware that they have an obligation – if not necessarily the means – to treat a form of suffering that has remained invisible or beyond their normal scope of work for far too long. Understanding memory, not only individual memory but also collective memory, may be key to preventing future cycles of violence. Historical humiliations and representations of the past give rise to murderous identities, feed most conflicts and lay the groundwork for incompatible visions of the future. The collective memory of societies is stored in their cultures and can be embodied in their landmarks and monuments. The emotion felt around the world in reaction to the accidental fire that engulfed Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris demonstrates that memory – whether tangible or not – is worth safeguarding. Memory, in the form of history, is an oft-discussed topic in times of conflict: the desire to rewrite history; the desire to wipe groups of people, and even memories of those people, from the face of the earth; and the desire to destroy literary, artistic and architectural treasures. The memory worth protecting can also be digital, and it can be stolen, manipulated or damaged. There is also the memory stored in our neurons, which we may one day be able to modify or even erase thanks to advances in neuroscience. Memory has strong implications for societal dynamics, in particular when it comes to preventing or ending conflicts. A number of States have adopted memorialization laws that govern commemorations and monuments and that may go so far as to prohibit revisionist history or apologizing for past atrocities. But when the guns of war fall silent, must we choose between deterrent sanctions and a general amnesty, justice and reconciliation, establishing the truth and forgetting? It is no surprise that transitional justice has developed into a separate area of study in the field of social sciences. EDITORIAL

中文翻译：

---

记忆：新的人道主义前沿

转型、自主武器、气候变化、创新竞赛等等——将整个评论专刊放在记忆的概念上似乎不合适。但出于不止一个原因，记忆是这场辩论的重要组成部分。首先，如果冲突受害者要从他们的创伤中获得任何缓解，就不能再忽视他们经历的心理影响。创伤性记忆给暴力幸存者、那些被连根拔起的人以及冲突结束很久后仍然失踪的人的家人造成了严重的痛苦。人道主义组织越来越意识到，他们有义务——如果不一定是手段——来治疗一种长期不可见或超出其正常工作范围的痛苦。理解记忆，不仅个人记忆而且集体记忆可能是防止未来暴力循环的关键。历史的屈辱和对过去的再现导致了凶残的身份认同，助长了大多数冲突，并为不相容的未来愿景奠定了基础。社会的集体记忆储存在他们的文化中，可以体现在他们的地标和纪念碑中。世界各地对席卷巴黎圣母院的意外火灾的反应表明，无论是否有形，记忆都值得保护。记忆，以历史的形式，是冲突时期经常讨论的话题：改写历史的愿望；想要从地球上抹去一群人，甚至是那些人的记忆；以及摧毁文学的欲望，艺术和建筑瑰宝。值得保护的记忆也可以是数字化的，它可以被盗、被操纵或损坏。还有记忆存储在我们的神经元中，由于神经科学的进步，我们有朝一日可能能够修改甚至删除这些记忆。记忆对社会动态具有重要意义，尤其是在预防或结束冲突方面。一些国家通过了管理纪念活动和纪念碑的纪念法，甚至禁止修正主义历史或为过去的暴行道歉。但当战火沉寂时，我们必须在威慑性制裁和普遍大赦、正义与和解之间做出选择，建立真理和遗忘？过渡司法已发展成为社会科学领域的一个独立研究领域也就不足为奇了。社论