Israel & Palestinians admitted to Red Cross Crystal

AP - Alexander G. Higgins

With a round of applause the Red Cross federation [ICRC - International Red Cross and Red Crescent] admitted Israel's Magen David Adom society simultaneously with the Palestine Red Crescent. An optional new emblem was adopted so that Israel could retain its red star of David instead of having to adopt the red cross or crescent used by the 184 other societies in the global movement....

Magen David Adom (MDA) has sought membership in the Red Cross movement since the 1930s _ even before Israel became a state _ but has been barred from entry because it objects to using the traditional symbols of the movement to identify its medical and humanitarian workers.

Mr. Alexander G. Higgins of the Associated Press has done an incredible job perverting this story.

For decades, at least fifty years, Israel's Magen David Adom has been trying to gain admission, trying to become accepted, to the international Red Cross. And they wanted to bring the Star of David with them. And why not? The ICRC had accepted the Arab symbols with no problem.

Our Muslim brethren started all this by insisting that they could not use the cross as a symbol for "religious reasons" -- i.e. because the cross reminded them of the Crusaders (the same reason people are afraid to fly the flag of England in England today). So, but of course, the Red Cross immediately caved to Arab demands, and in 1929 and 1949 included the Red Crescent and the Iranian Red Lion and Sun in the Geneva Conventions. In Mr. Higgins' version,

The simple red cross on a white background _ the reversal of colors of the Swiss flag _ was adopted as the emblem of the movement when it was founded in 1863...

But the symbol unintentionally reminded Muslims of the Christian Crusaders, and they insisted on their own red crescent in the 19th century.

Given that Muslim objections were "unintentional" and their insistence was met with immediate acquiesence, I suppose we are to assume that Israel's objections were... intentional? and therefore their membership had to be thwarted for decades?

According to the JTA (Nov. 2001), in its coverage of the resignation of the head of the American Red Cross over this issue:

[Israel's] exclusion generally is attributed to intense lobbying against Israel from Arab and Muslim members of the International Red Cross. Officially, the reason given is that allowing the Star of David might encourage other groups to press for inclusion of their emblems as well [Heaven forfend].

AIJAC May 2000 via JVL:

As early as the negotiations of the 1949 Geneva Convention, the excuse used for not including the Red Star of David as a recognized symbol was that the ICRC was seeking to find a new single neutral symbol for all humanitarian first aid agencies. This idea has been repeatedly invoked over the past fifty years, most recently at the October 1999 Conference of the ICRC. Moreover, the decision of the ICRC will still have to be ratified at a full session of the 188 countries of the Red Cross movement, and, in the past, it has been clear that many nations voted against proposals to allow MDA membership because of political hostility to Israel.

Mr. Higgins insists, right to the end, that it has been Israel's "objections" and not the objections of Muslims to Israel in general and the Magen David in particular - that has caused their exclusion.

... the new emblem was designed primarily to meet Israel's objections. Magen David Adom can combine it with the red star to create a new logo.

Israel's military will be able to use the crystal by itself on a white flag to protect medics and other humanitarian workers helping war casualties. But any society could combine the emblem with the cross or crescent _ or both _ for temporary use.

The thing about bias is that is never makes any sense. Feh! What's done is done, and the bias about what's done is done is also done.