Email 
Print 
Photo by GLEB GARANICH
At a time of heightened tension in the Middle East, the changes to international humanitarian law required to approve a new neutral logo that would allow the Israeli society's full membership are unlikely in the near future.
The delay places an extra financial strain on the international movement, since some U.S. funding is being withheld. Jobs have already been cut as a consequence, coinciding with a decentralisation drive away from the hub of Geneva.
This year, at least two members of the Red Cross and Red Crescent have been killed in acts of war and targeted attacks in Iraq and one in Afghanistan.At each death, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent has protested that under international law its staff should have been protected by the organisation's logo.
Frances Stevenson, coordinator and research fellow at the London-based Humanitarian Practice Network (HPN), told AlertNet: "It seems that humanitarian aid has become so embroiled and coopted by political processes that it is difficult to see how anybody could see humanitarian agencies as neutral and impartial from the political processes.
"The protection of those logos is now fast disappearing.
POLITICS OF AID "Aid agencies have to do everything they can to avoid being perceived to be in one political camp.
"The logo issue is part of that," she said.
The red cross and the red crescent are recognised by the Geneva-based International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), but the star of David is not.
This policy has sparked debate over the Israeli Magen David Adom (star of David society -- MDA).
Full membership of the International Federation of Red Cross and Crescent Societies (IFRC) requires ICRC recognition.
Florian Westphal, an ICRC communications delegate, told AlertNet: "(The logo) is a very important part of our business, because (it) indicates who we are and indicates very importantly that under the law we are not allowed to be attacked."
However, he dismissed suggestions that the current debate was linked to the perception of the organisation in the field.
Asked how a new emblem would affect the perception of the movement's activities, Westphal said: "It will come as another element to be explained."
Westphal said the red cross red crescent movement risked a multiplication of national emblems if the star of David was admitted.
"The whole thing about the emblem is that it works if people recognise it. And the more of them you have, the more complicated that gets," he said.
A NEUTRAL EMBLEM Haim Dagan, head of MDA's international department, said this argument did not hold up, since there was already more than one emblem. "The excuse of proliferation is not an excuse," he said.
The national societies of Kazakhstan and Eritrea also have reservations about the existing logos and want to use both the cross and the crescent.
These two societies and MDA, along with the Palestinian Red Crescent Society -- which cannot have full membership because it is not recognised as a state by the United Nations -- currently have observer status in the IFRC.
A new emblem has been proposed as a way out of the argument, in the form of a square red frame standing on one corner, with a white background. National societies would then be free to place their own symbols into the empty central space.
MDA would prefer the red star of David to be recognised as a new symbol by the ICRC, but Haim Dagan told AlertNet the new neutral emblem would be acceptable.
"It is a compromise that we can live with. But we are not going to give up our emblem. Not now, not in the future," he said.
"If this compromise is accepted, we will use the new neutral emblem and we will insert (the red star of David). With that we should be accepted as a full member. No doubt," Dagan said.
Agreement on the new emblem has been a tortuous process -- which has still not been finalised -- because its adoption needs to be enshrined in a new protocol to the Geneva Conventions.
INTERRUPTED BY INTIFADA A diplomatic conference involving all the states party to the Geneva Conventions was planned during 2000, but was put on hold because of the resurgence of violence between Israelis and Palestinians.
Ian Piper of the ICRC told AlertNet: "Until the situation in the Middle East calms down and until the situation evolves where (the states party to the Conventions) can actually meet, we are stuck."
Dr Mohammed Al-Hadid, president of the Jordanian Red Crescent society and vice-chairman of the standing commission of the Red Cross Red Crescent, said: "Because of the Intifada, and we didn’t want to politicise the conflict, it was postponed."
Asked why unrest in the Middle East would make it difficult to find a diplomatic solution to an issue that he regarded as a technicality, he said: "Governments and people usually do not stick to the agenda. You have a lot of opportunists who will use the occasion to raise other issues."
Al-Hadid dismissed suggestions that some Red Crescent societies had trouble accepting Israeli membership to the IFRC.
"We have to be realistic," he said. "There is a state of Israel.
"And if you are a member of the Red Cross/Red Crescent, you have to believe in the principles.
"And the principles say there is no discrimination. So how can we discriminate against Jews, Arabs, whatever?" Al-Hadid said.
OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE "It is just that we can not afford to give them some kind of recognition that can be tailor-made for them. They have to follow the rules.
"It is not a matter of Arabs or Muslim being against Israelis coming in," he said.
"If the additional protocol is approved at the diplomatic conference (of states party to the Geneva Conventions), then it is binding and we cannot say anything," Al-Hadid said.
Maha Azzam, research fellow at the Royal Institute of International Affairs and an expert on Middle East politics, told AlertNet that the ICRC's impartial image would be seriously damaged.
She said: "The Red Cross was seen as doing work that was welcomed. But it was only with the foundation of the red crescent that (the movement) has had a more acceptable face in the (Middle East) region.
"There was the symbolism of someone from the outside coming to help," she said.
"But with the development of the red crescent and its work in close alliance has given greater credence and acceptability to the Red Cross," Azzam said.
"The good work will continue (with the third emblem). But what it will arouse is again a feeling that there is a hidden agenda -- that the movement is giving in to Israeli pressure," she said.
GENEVA CONVENTIONS "On the level of public opinion, particularly in the Muslim world and among Muslims throughout the world, the imagery and symbolism of the star of David would cause a degree of antagonism.
"As soon as (the ICRC) accepts the star of David, its connections with Israel then become cemented."
Al-Hadid said: "If the additional protocol is approved at the diplomatic conference (of states party to the Geneva Conventions) and accommodates this, then it is binding and we cannot say anything."
The red cross on a white background was adopted as a neutral protective emblem by the first Geneva Convention in 1864, reversing the colours of the Swiss flag, as a tribute to the country where the movement was started.
Historians disagree over whether the cross on the Swiss flag was originally a symbol of Christianity or an adaptation of a regional flag used in battle.
The red crescent was first used as a protection symbol in 1876. It was officially recognised under a Geneva Convention in 1929.
In 1983, the movement became the League of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. It took on its present name in 1991.
A third emblem, the red lion and sun used by Persia, was also recognised. It has not been used since the Islamic revolution in 1979, but Iran reserves the right to use it in the future.
The 1929 Convention on emblems states that no new symbols will be recognised.
CASH CONSEQUENCES The non-admission of MDA -- which was founded in 1930 -- as a voting member has financial consequences for the secretariat in Geneva.
The American Red Cross has withheld $5 million a year in membership dues to the IFRC since 2000.
American Red Cross spokeswoman Devorah Goldburg told AlertNet: "We think they are not being neutral by not allowing them. We believe strongly that the Israeli Red Cross deserves to be a voting member," Goldburg said.
She emphasised that the American Red Cross was only withholding administrative dues, and that contributions to Red Cross and Red Crescent humanitarian activities would not be affected.
The unpaid dues amount to 25 per cent of the IFRC secretariat’s budget, and caused the IFRC to lay off 15 employees in July 2002.
Head of media relations at the IFRC, Denis McClean, told AlertNet no further job cuts were planned in the immediate future.
However, the financial constraints caused by the withheld dues coincide with a decentralisation process to move staff and resources out of Geneva. McClean said this process was unrelated to the funding shortfall because of the logo dispute.
"We don’t have access to that money but that has been factored into the budgetary calculations for some years," he said.
"(We are) continuing to implement our change strategy which does mean naturally a decrease of staff and resources in Geneva as we build up our field infrastructure," McClean said.
The call for full membership of MDA is echoed by the U.S. political establishment.
The U.S. Senate has agreed to a provision to withhold an $8 million State Department contribution to the ICRC headquarters, if the State department finds that MDA is not being included within the movement.
However, for the last two years U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell has determined that MDA is being allowed to participate in the activities of the international movement, and has released the funds.
