As the International Committee of the Red Cross adopts Israel's "red crystal" emblem, Dina Ezzat in Geneva monitors the erosion of European support for the Palestinian cause It was not a surprise to any Arab diplomat in Geneva that a few days ago the extraordinary 29th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent finalised the official if non- governmental adoption of an additional emblem for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Red Crescent. The conference in the world's humanitarian capital, Geneva, which is the seat of the ICRC, welcomed the decision of a diplomatic gathering in the city late last year to adopt a third additional protocol to the Geneva Conventions, creating a "red crystal" emblem alongside the existing red cross, red crescent and the now-suspended red lion that was used by Iran prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution. After decades of intensive lobbying, Israel is now celebrating the formal inclusion of the "red crystal", which will be included with the star of Magen David Adom, Israel's national emergency medical service founded in 1930, when operating in Israel and territories under Israeli occupation. This development came in conclusion to a long process that was launched over a year ago by the Swiss government, in its capacity as the depository state for the Geneva Conventions, to encourage the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the Israeli Magen David Adom and the Palestinian Red Crescent -- the latter of which lacks proper legal status within the ICRC community due to the fact that Palestine is not recognised by the international community as a state. By virtue of this memorandum of understanding and consequent talks, Arab diplomats who took part in the ICRC conference late last month in Geneva see Israel as being afforded new forms of international recognition. "The Israelis are gaining more ground on the international scene and within international organisations, including those promoting human rights and international humanitarian law that Israel violates every day and every hour, and there is nothing that we can do about it," commented one Geneva-based Arab diplomat. The ICRC resolution to adopt the new emblem was passed by consensus on 20 June, unlike the December 2005 inter-governmental approval of the additional emblem that was passed by majority vote. As Arab diplomats in Geneva recognise, both results indicate a shift in the climate concerning Israel's status as a member of the international community. While affirming that they do not contest the right of Israel to participate actively in all international organisations, some Arab diplomats worry that the world seems to be overlooking the fact that Israel is an occupying power that refuses to withdraw from Arab territories annexed by force in 1967, and that is violating the very same Geneva Conventions every day in the occupied Palestinian territories. Arab diplomats in Geneva argue that no effort aimed at including Israel in the international human rights community has been useful in terms of reducing violations by Israel's occupation army against innocent Palestinians or facilitating the job of the much-handicapped Palestinian Red Crescent Society. The red cross and red crescent emblems are recognised by more than 190 states worldwide. According to the ICRC's definition, these emblems are meant to protect medical personnel, buildings and equipment in times of armed conflict, and to identify national Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, the ICRC and the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent. This hasn't stopped the Israeli army from targeting ambulances and raiding hospitals in the course of its occupation of Palestinian territories. In an ICRC press statement, chief spokeswoman Antonella Notari argued that the adoption of the new emblem is "a big plus for the universality [of the ICRC]". "National societies that had a problem with using either the red cross or red crescent now have another choice, and in some circumstances, the new emblem may create conditions that allow movement members to work more safely given that it has none of the historical baggage or connotations that are sometimes attached to the red cross and red crescent," Notari said. In the view of one member of the Arab diplomatic corps in Geneva, while filled with optimism and legal precision, the statement falls short of acknowledging facts on the ground -- particularly the atrocities of the Israeli occupation army against Palestinians under occupation. ICRC officials, for their part, insist the organisation steer away from personal views. Arab diplomats admit they are losing the battle to Israel: "The Europeans used to be more understanding of the fact that Israel should not be granted extra recognition from the international community while it is still carrying on with its shameful practices in the Palestinian territories. Now the Europeans are not talking this language and the Swiss government in particular is heading the shift in positions," commented a senior Arab diplomat in Geneva. This "shift in positions" is attributed to the success of aggressive Israeli diplomacy in Europe. Israeli exertions have not been matched by Arab diplomatic efforts. "Very few senior Arab officials care about the Palestinian cause or the relevant legal matters. They do not even bring them up in their encounters with European interlocutors, no matter how much their missions in Geneva press the issue," the same senior Arab diplomat added. To further lobby the Europeans recently, sources say, Israeli diplomats have also used the accession of Hamas to power in Palestine. Lack of consensus within Palestinian ranks is also used to bolster the case of Israel. Palestinian humanitarian sources argue that the memorandum of understanding signed last year between the Palestine Red Crescent Society and Magen David Adom caused much disagreement within Palestinian quarters. Palestinian diplomats admit that Israelis are also using the rift between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the Hamas government. "The additional emblem is only one sign of the erosion of support for Arab stances in the international arena. In Geneva, we also have serious problems with getting the newly formed UN Human Rights Council to accept developments in the occupied Palestinian territories on its agenda for the 2006 sessions. This would have never been an issue with the outgoing UN Commission on Human Rights which issued many resolutions in support of Palestinian rights," stated the senior Arab diplomat. Arab diplomats in New York have also a similar account to share with their counterparts in Geneva. "Even within the UN General Assembly, it is becoming increasingly difficult to secure European support for proposed Arab resolutions related to the rights of Palestinians under occupation," commented one New York-based Arab diplomat. He added that the pattern of European voting is not at all in favour of the Arab point of view. For their part, a few European diplomats who spoke to Al-Ahram Weekly on condition of anonymity argued that their governments could not be expected to cooperate with the government of Hamas, which is considered a terrorist group by the European Union. The mere fact that Hamas is considered a terrorist group, argue Arab diplomats based in Brussels, seat of the European Union, is in itself clear indication of the failure of Arab diplomacy. In Geneva, New York and Brussels, Arab diplomats admit that their governments have serious work to do if they wish to regain the support of the Europeans. And -- some of them argue -- the first step in that direction should be to get the Swiss government to act on an overdue assignment by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to consider ways of implementing the ICJ's advisory opinion issued over a year ago on the illegal status of the separation wall built by Israel on Palestinian occupied territories.
