The International Committee of the Red Cross

A Neutral Humanitarian Actor

David P. Forsythe, Barbara Ann Rieffer-Flanagan

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781138185548
• eBook ISBN: 9781317289029
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Peace & Global Development
• Index: Politics & International Relations

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has a complex position in international relations, being the guardian of international humanitarian law but often acting discretely to advance human dignity. Treated by most governments as if it were an inter-governmental organization, the ICRC is a non-governmental organization, all-Swiss at the top, and it is given rights and duties in the 1949 Geneva Conventions for Victims of War.

Written by two formidable experts in the field, this book analyzes international humanitarian action as practiced by the International Red Cross, explaining its history and structure as well as examining contemporary field experience and broad diplomatic initiatives related to its principal tasks. Such tasks include:

• ensuring that detention conditions are humane for those imprisoned by reason of political conflict or war
• providing material and moral relief in conflict
• promoting development of the humanitarian part of the laws of war
• improving the unity and effectiveness of the movement

Fully updated throughout, the new edition will also include brand new material on:

• armed actors who do not accept humanitarian restrictions on their actions, including expanded coverage of the Islamic State (ISIL, ISIS), Al Shabab, and Boko Haram, among others
• Syrian internationalized civil war
• issue of drone strikes and targeted killings, and the continuing push for regulation of what is called cyber war
• the question of the field of application of international humanitarian law (what is the battlefield?). Particularly when states declare "war" on "terrorist groups" operating inside other states
• regulation of new weapons and new uses of old weapons

1 Historical development

• The birth and early years of the ICRC

• Development of the organization

• The first major challenges

• Expanding international humanitarian law

• Decolonization and national liberation

• Challenges in the Western Hemisphere

• Organizational changes

• Conclusions

The birth and early years of the ICRC

As discussed in the Introduction, the ICRC has its origins in the Battle of Solferino in 1859. This battle, which occurred in present-day northern Italy, was part of the Franco-Austrian War. It was after witnessing the bloodshed at the Battle of Solferino, and the lack of medical attention for those wounded, that Henry Dunant felt compelled to work toward a remedy for this lack of care. Dunant, writing his account of the battle in A Memory of Solferino (1862), described the battlefield as “a disaster from the point of view of humanity.”¹ On the battleground lay corpses amid pools of blood and over 23,000 wounded.² Dunant was appalled to learn that there were few doctors or medical services available for badly wounded soldiers.

In response to the atrocious conditions of the injured soldiers at Solferino, Dunant began a drive to assist the wounded in war via private societies. In his words, “Would it not be possible to create societies in every European country whose aim would be to assure that prompt and devoted care is given to those wounded in battle?”³ These ideas would eventually lead to the creation of the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International RC Movement, and the development of the Geneva Conventions for Victims of War. Dunant was not alone in his concerns for the vulnerable in war, nor was he the first to consider the issue. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a philosopher also from Geneva, wrote in the eighteenth century that states declare war against one another, not against individual soldiers. Therefore, when soldiers stopped fighting because of injury or surrender, they cease to be legitimate targets and should be treated with respect.⁴ Florence Nightingale and Clara Barton were also concerned for the welfare of the injured in war and offered medical assistance to those in need (although some of their activities were unknown to Dunant in the 1860s). In addition, Francis Lieber, also Swiss, developed a set of rules to limit war during the American Civil War of 1861–1865.

The ten years after Dunant visited the Battlefield of Solferino were a crucial time in the development of what became the ICRC. When Dunant returned from Italy he began a campaign for the creation of private aid societies to assist those individuals wounded in combat. He envisioned the creation of national organizations in countries throughout Europe. To further this goal he distributed A Memory of Solferino. This manuscript was well received throughout Europe due to Dunant’s vivid description of the horrors of war. Many of the pious and philanthropic individuals who lived in Geneva in the 1860s were drawn to Dunant’s vision. Genevans such as General Henri Dufour, attorney Gustave Moynier, Dr. Louis Appia, and Dr. Théodore Maunoir took Dunant’s work seriously and, with Dunant, created the International Committee for the Relief to the Wounded in Situations of War.⁵ These individuals, especially Moynier with his organizational abilities, would have a profound impact on the direction of the organization and of humanitarian protection. Moynier was active in the organization for over 40 years and was president from 1864 to 1910. Appia observed various wars, including Schleswig-Holstein (1864) and wrote numerous commentaries and reports for Geneva. Dufour was also influential as a military leader. His humanitarian orders (protection for women, children, and the wounded) in the Swiss civil war (1847) put many of the ideas into practice that Dunant was to popularize slightly more than ten years later.

The first significant step to implementing Dunant’s vision was initiating a conference in October 1863 of private individuals and some government officials from various Western states, to see how receptive they were to private assistance to those wounded in war. This was followed by a conference of states, with the help of the Swiss government, to codify humanitarian principles. The goal for men such as Dufour and Dunant was to humanize and civilize war. States had more pragmatic motivations for their interest in aiding wounded soldiers. With technology improving, countries were confronted by weapons that could do greater damage (dum-dum bullets) as well as improvements in the transmission of information from battlefields (telegraph). Hence, soldiers who fought for their countries were suffering more gruesome wounds and citizens at home learned about it more quickly. Thus, national leaders sought to limit domestic criticism by helping their wounded nationals.⁶ And therein lies an enduring aspect of the RC Movement: state pragmatism and self-interest alongside humanitarian goals.

It is worth noting the role religious motivation played in the development of the ICRC and humanitarian principles of war. Dunant’s powerful religious drive led him to believe he had been chosen to accomplish a divine mission. While others were not as convinced of divine intervention, they too saw the role of Christian devotion to the less fortunate as an important element in humanitarian goals in war. For example Dr. Appia, while observing the Schleswig-Holstein war in 1864, came to believe that civilian efforts to assist those wounded should be based in part on religious devotion. Thus he saw those civilian volunteers as an army of Christians implementing their faith. Others associated with the Red Cross movement would also see in Christian good works the motivation for activities and adherences to the Geneva Convention of 1864. Yet Moynier, so influential in the ICRC’s early years, declared that the agency was not a faith-based organization.

Religion aside, the result of the convergence of national self-interest and humanitarian spirit in 1864 was the first Geneva Convention for Victims of War, which was signed by 12 Western states including Prussia and France (the United States gave its consent to be bound in 1882, after much lobbying by Clara Barton, the founder of the American Red Cross and a strong supporter of the ICRC). Its primary contribution was to neutralize the war-wounded and the medical personnel who tended them. After these legal developments occurred there were many opportunities to test Dunant’s vision in practice. (However, after 1867 Dunant was no longer able to play a large role in the organization he envisioned. Financial scandals and debt associated with his business dealings, as well as a strained, competitive relationship with Moynier, led to Dunant’s resignation from the organization in Geneva).

Development of the organization

Between 1870 and World War I, the ICRC would play a limited role in a number of wars. In addition, its central position as leader of Red Cross humanitarian protection came under attack from various circles. The French wanted to move the headquarters of the RC Movement to Paris, where the French aid society would have played the leading role. Slightly later the Russians sought an expanded role within the RC Movement, with the Russian czar seeing himself as a major humanitarian figure. In general, these four decades witnessed humanitarian principles being transformed by nationalism and patriotism, leaving in their wake Dunant’s original dreams of universal and neutral protection. By and large, the ICRC offered money to national Red Cross societies and encouraged others to report on activities undertaken. It did not, however, attempt to provide assistance to the wounded as a strong, independent actor on the ground.

Box 1.1 Resolutions adopted 26–29 October 1863, Preparatory Conference

Art. 1 Each country shall have a Committee whose duty it shall be, in time of war and if the need arises, to assist the Army Medical Services by every means in its power. The Committee shall organize itself in the manner which seems to it most useful and appropriate.

Art. 2 An unlimited number of Sections may be formed to assist the Committee, which shall be the central directing body.

Art. 3 Each Committee shall get in touch with the Government of its country, so that its services may be accepted should the occasion arise.

Art. 4 In peacetime, the Committees and Sections shall take steps to ensure their real usefulness in time of war, especially by preparing material relief of all sorts and by seeking to train and instruct voluntary medical personnel.

Art. 5 In time of war, the Committees of belligerent nations shall supply relief to their respective armies as far as their means permit: in particular, they shall organize voluntary personnel and place them on an active footing and, in agreement with the military authorities, shall have premises made available for the care of the wounded.

They may call for assistance upon the Committees of neutral countries.

Art. 6 On the request or with the consent of the military authorities, Committees may send voluntary medical personnel to the battlefield where they shall be placed under military command.

Art. 7 Voluntary medical personnel attached to armies shall be supplied by the respective Committees with everything necessary for their upkeep.

Art. 8 They shall wear in all countries, as a uniform distinctive sign, a white armlet with a red cross.

Art. 9 The Committees and Sections of different countries may meet in international assemblies to communicate the results of their experience and to agree on measures to be taken in the interests of the work.

Art. 10 The exchange of communications between the Committees of the various countries shall be made for the time being through the intermediary of the Geneva Committee.

Independently of the above Resolutions, the Conference makes the following Recommendations:

a that Governments should extend their patronage to Relief Committees which may be formed, and facilitate as far as possible the accomplishment of their task.

b that in time of war the belligerent nations should proclaim the neutrality of ambulances and military hospitals, and that neutrality should likewise be recognized, fully and absolutely, in respect of official medical personnel, voluntary medical personnel, inhabitants of the country who go to the relief of the wounded, and the wounded themselves;

c that a uniform distinctive sign be recognized for the Medical Corps of all armies, or at least for all persons of the same army belonging to this Service; and, that a uniform flag also be adopted in all countries for ambulances and hospitals.

(www.icrc.org)

Hence Moynier and others at the ICRC sought to promote the development of national RC societies in the Western world. They did not desire to develop a strong centralized organization in Geneva which dictated activities to those aid societies. Had they tried to develop a strong centralized authority, their efforts probably would have been rejected, as national RC societies were moving closer to their country’s military. In many respects this is not difficult to understand. Military commanders did not want charitable do-gooders to get in the way during armed conflict. Yet they could also see the benefit of receiving additional money and support for their soldiers. Thus instead of allowing independent Red Cross societies to develop within the nation, political leaders sought to nationalize and militarize the role of the national RC societies as much as possible. This has resulted in limited autonomy for RC societies in relation to national civilian and military authorities, but considerable autonomy for the RC societies vis-à-vis the ICRC.

One could see the militarization of the Red Cross societies in the Franco–Prussian War (1870–1871). The Prussians subsumed the national aid societies into an arm of the military’s medical branch. Prince Pless directed that voluntary aid assistance and nurses from the aid societies be placed under the command of the army’s medical staff.⁷ The Prussian initiatives were efficient and well received, so much so that other RC societies sought to replicate that militarization. (The French, on the other hand, were neither well prepared for the war nor well informed of their obligations under the Geneva Convention of 1864.)

An additional problem which the ICRC encountered during this time was the development of a neutral emblem to represent the Movement. The ICRC had opted for a red cross against a white background (the inverse of the Swiss flag). This was not a welcome symbol for many in the Islamic world due to the association of a cross with Christianity and the tortured history between the Christian West and the Islamic East during the Crusades. In the 1870s, the Ottoman (Turkish) aid society opted for a red crescent instead. Consequently, the ICRC decided to accept this symbol and thereby avoided a disagreement with the Ottoman Empire. Multiple symbols, however, which later grew to three when Iran adopted the Red Lion and Sun, symbolized the fragmentation of the Movement and the difficulty of getting unified, neutral action in the face of national and cultural differences. Once the 1929 diplomatic conference on the laws of war, comprised of states, accepted multiple emblems as neutral signs in armed conflict, however, the issue of multiple RC emblems was set in legal stone.

The first major challenges

World War I and the inter-war years

World War I was a significant event in the history of the ICRC. The ICRC expanded its original mandate, which had focused on wounded soldiers, to helping civilians and prisoners of war. It also spoke out against the use of certain weapons, such as poisonous gas. It took up the plight of refugees and the internally displaced. The war confirmed the need for ICRC field action, as it was better placed than national RC societies in the various belligerent nations to implement neutral policies.

Gustave Ador, president of the ICRC during the war, sent delegates (Swiss attorneys, doctors, professors) to various military camps to stop reprisals against POWs (prisoners of war) and improve their material conditions.⁸ Conditions in POW camps varied considerably from region to region. Various brutalities were committed by the Russians against their German prisoners, including lack of food, exposure to harsh weather conditions, and forced hard labor. Additional complaints were leveled against the Germans’ harsh medical treatments (e.g. lack of chloroform during surgery). Other POW camps (British, French, and Japanese) were run relatively humanely, providing food and reading materials for captured soldiers. More important for the reputation of the ICRC was the fact that in most cases conditions in camps improved after ICRC delegates visited.

Additional ICRC activities during World War I were equally important. The ICRC set up various offices/warehouses to assist in the tracing of healthy and wounded soldiers held by their enemies. To facilitate these activities numerous volunteers poured into the ICRC’s offices in Geneva to collect letters and inquiries about soldiers. Inquiries were then sent to national governments to see if additional information could be obtained. By the end of the war, the agency had handled over two million letters concerning the status of soldiers.⁹ In addition, parcels and packages were sent to the ICRC to distribute to soldiers in POW camps.

All in all, despite the inhumane events of World War I, including the use of poisonous gas, the ICRC emerged as a respected moral authority, driven by humanitarian principles. At various points during the war, the ICRC reminded the warring parties of their obligations under the Geneva Convention and criticized the barbarity of the war. In recognition o...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of illustrations
• Acknowledgement
• List of abbreviations
• Introduction
• 1. Historical development
• 2. Organization and management
• 3. The ICRC and international humanitarian law
• 4. Humanitarian assistance and restoration of family ties
• 5. Detention visits
• 6. Conclusion
• Select bibliography
• Index
• Routledge Global Institutions Series