WARNING: This is a high volume ping list
Posted on 02/12/2004 6:54:13 AM PST by Alouette
The Red Cross is famous for crisscrossing war zones and natural disaster areas to provide for humanitarian needs regardless of race, creed, color, or nationality. It is a veritable symbol of the unity of humanity and the sacredness of human life. It is the very universality of the Red Cross's mission that makes Israel's exclusion all the more disturbing.
Israel has never been admitted to full membership in the International Committee of the Red Cross, which has seen fit to accept 176 other nations. The pretext thus far was Magen David Adom's refusal to replace its red Star of David with either the cross or crescent.
This in itself blatantly betrays bigotry. Only the Jewish state's first-aid services are required to operate under the emblems of others, which are either historically or currently inimical to its citizens.
Now we find the ICRC all but admitting what we knew, namely that the matter of symbols was just an excuse. Top ICRC officials recently told MDA delegates that it would take "progress in the peace process" to persuade member states to approve the MDA's inclusion and recognition of its emblem. ICRC President Dr. Jakob Kellenberger and Secretary-General Markku Miskala argued that it's up to member states to vote for accepting Israel and that this is highly predicated on the "creation of a better atmosphere" in the region.
In other words, Israel's enemies continue to hold the key. Not only can they muster a majority against the MDA, but, by supporting Arab terror campaigns against Israelis, they can make sure that the "better atmosphere" is never attained – unless Israel allows itself to be significantly weakened, even endangered.
By acquiescing to such a hostile agenda, the ICRC not only continues to reject Israeli membership but also submits to diktats from some of the darkest forces in the international arena. In other words, the ICRC, which perhaps more than any organization relies on its apolitical nature to maintain access to all sides, is displaying flagrant political prejudice.
It's hard to comprehend what good this does the ICRC. If the idea is to curry Arab favor and ingratiate the organization with Muslim extremists, then the ICRC has certainly failed, as its being targeted in Iraq plainly shows. In fact, ICRC politicization only renders its staffers all the more vulnerable in international hot points. Subscribing to anti-Israeli politics will certainly not confer immunity, but will expose it to greater extortionist demands.
The ICRC's record thus far hasn't served to discourage political blackmail. Quite the contrary. Israel's enemies were emboldened by the Red Cross's record since the MDA first applied for membership in 1949. The Red Crescent was recognized from the ICRC's earliest days and for a long time the Iranian Red Lion and Sun was accepted, too. The red Star of David alone proved objectionable.
For the past decade the ICRC has been posturing as seeking "a favorable resolution" of the emblem issue, but couldn't bring itself to simply accept the Jewish symbol. This despite the fact that the top-notch medical aid provided by the MDA to all, regardless of nationality or religion, is not disputed.
Under international law, the MDA emblem must be respected. Nevertheless, the ICRC has failed to protest when Arab terrorists targeted MDA response teams treating terrorism victims. At the same time, the ICRC gives unstinting resonance to the most outlandish Arab charges about fabricated Israeli "war crimes." Likewise galling is the ICRC's failure to censure the Palestinian Red Crescent for transporting explosives in ambulances.
In March 2000, ICRC ex-chief Cornelio Sommaruga exclaimed: "If we're going to have the Shield of David, why would we not have to accept the swastika?" He was responding to a speech in which the then head of the American Red cross, Bernadine Healy, advocated acceptance of Israel and its emblem. Healy's courageous stand against Israel's exclusion from the ICRC eventually led to her resignation.
Today's ICRC tone may be somewhat less strident, but real change has yet to occur. After 55 years, Israel's MDA is still relegated to observer status. It may not matter much in practical terms, but it's further evidence for Israelis that they can expect no justice in international forums. It's the same exclusion and discrimination the Jewish state suffers in other ostensibly apolitical spheres, such as art, sports, and scholarship.
It's hard to imagine a more wrong-headed message from an organization that claims to favor "an improved atmosphere."
I agree. If there's any Hindu or Native American aid organization using the swastika as their symbol, they should also be accepted by the ICRC.
WARNING: This is a high volume ping list
Shilling for MONEY??? All the solicitations that I receive from them are for MY BLOOD!
I can provide a semi-serious answer, the "crescent countries" provide far more business.
The emblems (Iran no longer used) were established in 1949.
I doubt anyone expected Israel to last long enough to matter. The Red Cross position, note the problem isn't their unwillingness to accept the Star of David, rather Israel's unwillingness to accept the Cross or Crescent
The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement has been working for some years towards a solution to the problems faced by countries which cannot use the emblems established by the Geneva Conventions.
These issues are complex and legal, but of relevance to all members of the Movement and to Society membership in many countries.
The process now in place for the establishment of an additional protective Emblem and the ability of National Societies to place within it certain indicative emblems has been the subject of careful consultation with all interested governments and National Societies. A consensus has emerged to create another emblem process, and to achieve this early this year.
This means that the conditions for the recognition and admission of Israel's Magen David Adom and the Red Cross Society of Eritrea will be set in time for both to become a full part of the Movement in the near future.
The Movement as a whole sees the resolution of the problems as a matter of great importance.
In March 2000, ICRC ex-chief Cornelio Sommaruga exclaimed: "If we're going to have the Shield of David, why would we not have to accept the swastika?"IOW, Sommaruga equates the Shield of David with the Swastika. IOW, Sommaruga, like his Red Crescent allies, is a Jew hating Nazi revisionist.
It might have something to do with the fact that Rabbis don't issue fatwas on those who irritate them.
IMO the fear of the fatwa is behind a lot of the "respect" that islam receives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.