“Humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, voluntary service, unity, and universality” are the fundamental principles listed prominently on the website of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). In its code of conduct the very first rule is that “the conduct of ICRC employees must be consistent with the Fundamental Principles…” and there are separate provisions that “employees must refrain from taking a public stance on situations or events and from referring to political or military situations in their communications with third parties.”

Yet recently leaked Facebook posts show Haythem Abid, ICRC head of office in Algeria and director of the Libya sub-delegation, promoting and engaging in anti-Israel protests, calling Israel’s fight against Hamas “terrorism,” and provocatively stating online that he is no longer neutral, writing “Fuck neutral shit.”

In real life, he works as Haythem Abid:

On social media, he goes as Ethan Abid, but without hiding his face — and in fact openly showing his ICRC identity such as his cover photo next to an ICRC plane.

Haythem Abid (aka “Ethan Abid”) was hired at the ICRC in August 2018 as a Field Protection Delegate, and has since climbed the ranks to become an ICRC Head of Office.

In flagrant violation of the ICRC code of conduct, Abid has taken a public anti-Israel stance, posting online, attending political rallies, and explicitly renouncing his neutrality.

In this Facebook post from October 24th, 2023 — with the ICRC on his Facebook profile cover photo — Abid shows himself holding a large Palestinian flag at the giant “Free Palestine” rally of Sunday, October 22nd, which was co-organized by “Montreal4Palestine,” an antisemitic group that handed out candies on October 7th to celebrate the Hamas massacre, and which was subject to judicial sanction after its protesters hurled abuse at Jews in front of the Montreal Jewish community center.

Another Facebook post from October 27th, 2023 shows Abid circulating a flyer for another pro-Palestine rally co-sponsored by the “Palestinian Youth Movement,” which openly calls for the destruction of Israel and glorifies terrorist “martyrs.”

On December 2nd, Abid went live on Facebook attending another pro-Palestine rally:

In other Facebook posts shared on October 25th, Abid calls the current conflict in Gaza a “genocide.” He subsequently says that what Israel is doing in Gaza “is not fighting terrorism, it is terrorism.”

In another Facebook post that he published on October 8th, the day after the October 7th massacre, Abid posted a photo of the alleged killing in 2000 of Muhammad al-Durrah. In fact, that alleged incident was found to be staged and no one was killed or even hurt. But Abid’s intention was clear: he was attempting to justify the killing, maiming, raping, and torture of innocent civilians that took place in Israel on October 7th, as merited retribution.

On November 14, 2023, Abid posted a Hamas propaganda video on Facebook that praises the fact that Israel has been unable to defeat Hamas, claims Hamas treats hostages well, shows scenes of October 7th, and claims that God is on Hamas’ side so Israel will always fail.

Finally, if there was any doubt of Haythem’s contempt for the ICRC’s fundamental principle of neutrality, Haythem made his position exceedingly clear with a Facebook post on October 18th, 2023, where he said: “Fuck neutral shit, today being neutral is taking a side.”

Haythem Abid should be fired from the ICRC immediately for breaching the ICRC code of conduct and values.

But a larger questions remain: How many other Haythem Abids exist within the ranks of the ICRC?

The post ICRC Head of Office posts Hamas propaganda, says “f*** neutrality” in leaked Facebook posts appeared first on UN Watch.

UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer said the appointment was inappropriate, and called on the ICRC to cancel it.

2/ @swissinfo: “The ethics report says many in & outside UNRWA knew of the affair between the married Krähenbühl and his chief advisor. He was often at her workplace rather than his. They travelled business class together, while others travelled economy.” https://t.co/9m9VTbxzf8

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) December 22, 2023

4/ Krähenbühl promoted a false narrative that he was pushed out by a Trump-Israel-Jewish cabal.

But his spin was refuted by the most pro-Palestinian UNRWA officials, academic and journalists.

In 2021, Geneva's Le Temps confirmed many of the most serious charges against Mr.…

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) December 22, 2023

6/ On 6 November 2019, UNRWA Commissioner-General Pierre Krähenbühl unexpectedly resigned his position within hours of being placed on administrative leave by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

Guterres had acted pursuant to the findings of an investigation into…

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) December 22, 2023

8/ In the leadup to Al Jazeera’s above-mentioned award-winning reporting on this matter, Mr. Krähenbühl had during the summer of 2019 removed a number of those implicated in the Ethics Office report from their positions, including his Deputy, Sandra Mitchell, and his Chief of…

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) December 22, 2023

10/ MR: Yet both of you were interviewed by the makers of the RTS Temps Présent documentary, and also communicated with Orient XXI. How did they respond?

RB & LT: When we were approached by RTS at the beginning of 2020, the principal filmmaker, Anne-Frédérique Widmann, informed…

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) December 22, 2023

12/ (RB & LT, cont'd): The articles refer to Mr. Krähenbühl’s extensive travels in search of funding, “practically leaving the organizations to its own devices”, or, rather, to his American Deputy, Sandra Mitchell, and Chief of Staff, Hakam Shahwan, a Palestinian whom the…

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) December 22, 2023

The post Red Cross taps new chief who quit UNRWA amid ethics, abuse & corruption scandal appeared first on UN Watch.

Out of 187 tweets published by the main Red Cross accounts on Twitter (now known as X), including those by ICRC president  Mirjana Spoljaric Egger and director-general Robert Mardini, 77% were focused on criticizing Israel, expressly or by implication. Only 7% of the tweets criticized Hamas.

For example, on October 17th, the ICRC promoted the false Hamas story that Israel attacked and “destroyed” Al-Ahli hospital, saying it was “shocked and horrified” that “hundreds were killed,” including “patients “killed in a hospital bed,” and doctors “losing their lies trying to save others. None of these was true. The hospital parking lot was attacked by an Islamic Jihad rocket. ICRC never corrected its misinformation.

“The Red Cross claims to be neutral, but its public statements are anything but,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch and an international human rights lawyer.

“While it’s difficult to judge what the Red Cross does behind closed doors in its diplomatic work, we can certainly assess their public statements, and what we found is alarming. The world’s leading humanitarian organization is failing to uphold its core principles of neutrality. It’s failing to call out a terrorist group that systematically violates the Geneva Conventions and the principles of international humanitarian law,” said Neuer.

“Instead, the Red Cross and its leaders have repeatedly promoted the notion that Israel is responsible for a war that was in fact launched by Hamas, with its invasion and massacre of October 7th, with the knowledge and intention of incurring Palestinian casualties. By systematically omitting the direct responsibility of Hamas for the damage to civilians and property in Gaza, the Red Cross promotes a narrative that wrongly blames Israel — a democracy that has made efforts, unprecedented in any other army, and exceeding the requirements of the laws of war, to save Palestinian civilian lives, including warning them to leave target zones.”

“By refusing to condemn Hamas’s repeated and unprovoked aggression, and by systematically glossing over the suffering of Israelis subjected to 11,000 rockets in the past two months alone, including the suffering of 300,000 displaced Israelis, the ICRC and its leaders have effectively validated and encouraged Hamas’s cynical tactics to exploit and trample the laws of war.”

Methodology

The following analysis examines social media posts by key ICRC accounts on X (Twitter), including top officials, related to the Hamas-Israel war. We categorized tweets as solely criticizing Israel or Hamas, or criticizing both sides. This was determined by the presence of explicit criticism of a particular party, or implicit. For example, even without an express condemnation of Israel, a post that is clearly designed to evoke sympathy for Palestinians in Gaza, by showing photos of a distressed child, or emotional language, and which does not mention the responsibility of Hamas, will often evoke antipathy toward Israel.

Accounts Examined:

1. @ICRC
2. @ICRCpresident 
3. @RMardiniICRC (Director-General of the International Committee of the Red Cross)
4. @ICRC_ilot (Delegation of the ICRC in Israel and the Occupied Territories
5. @FCarboniICRC (ICRC Regional Director for Near and Middle East)
6. @MamadouSowICRC (Head of ICRC for the GCC)

Period examined: October 6, 2023 – November 28, 2023

Summary:

187 Total Tweets

144 Tweets (77%) focused solely on criticizing Israel

29 Tweets (16%) criticized both sides

14 Tweets (7%) criticized Hamas

1. Account Examined: @ICRC

69 Total Tweets

49 Tweets (71%) focused solely on criticizing Israel

      Examples:

• (Oct 17) “We are shocked and horrified by reports that Al Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza was destroyed and hundreds were killed…”

International humanitarian law is clear

Civilians – Medical professionals – Hospitals – Ambulances – Clinics

All are protected under the law of war. pic.twitter.com/EyeMZzdp3z

— ICRC (@ICRC) October 17, 2023

• (Oct 14) “Thousands of buildings have been destroyed. Mass casualties are unlike anything seen in past years. The medical system is on its knees.”
• (Oct 10) (Oct 11)  (Oct 12) (Oct 12) (Oct 16) (Oct 18) (Oct 18) (Oct 19) (Oct 19) (Oct 20) (Oct 23) (Oct 24) (Oct 26) (Oct 27) (Oct 27) (Oct 28 ) (28 Oct) (Oct 30) (Oct 31) (Nov 1) (Nov 1) (Nov 1) (Nov 3) (Nov 3) (Nov 3) (Nov 6) (Nov 7) (Nov 8) (Nov 8) (Nov 9) (Nov 12) (Nov 12) (Nov 13) (Nov 13) (Nov 14) (Nov 14) (Nov 15) (Nov 15) (Nov 15) (17 Nov) (Nov 17) (Nov 19) (20 Nov) (20 Nov) (Nov 21) (Nov 21) (Nov 28)

12 Tweets (17%) criticized both sides

      Examples:

• (Nov 7) “1 month on, civilians in Gaza & Israel are being forced to endure tremendous suffering and loss. And the impact on children is devastating. Parties must uphold their obligations under IHL & spare all civilians from the conduct of military operations.”
• (Nov 20) “In the face of such horrific suffering, we continue our urgent call for the protection of civilians impacted by violence in Gaza & Israel. Under IHL Hostage taking is prohibited. Civilians & health workers must be protected.”
• (Oct 7) (Oct 10 ) (Oct 12) (Oct 12) (Oct 13)(Oct 17) (Oct 28 ) (Nov 7 ) (Nov 7) (Oct 27)

8 Tweets (12%) criticized Hamas 

      Examples:

• (Nov 14) “We have been persistently advocating on behalf of the hostages held in Gaza. Hostage-taking is prohibited under IHL. They must be released. They must be treated humanely. They must have access to medical care. They must be able to communicate with their loved ones.”
• (Nov 20) “No child should ever be held captive. We continue to call for the immediate release of all hostages & to check on their condition – especially children, the sick, and the elderly. We stand by ready to facilitate any future release.” 
• (Oct 13) (Nov 12) (Nov 14) (17 Nov) (Nov 20) (Nov 22) (Nov 25)

Mentions

1 Hamas

0 Condemn

19 Hostages (Includes hostage release updates with no criticism)

0 Terror/Terrorism

0 Rocket/Rockets

0 October 7th Massacre

Comparative Analysis of Language Used

• Tweets used emotive and sometimes hyperbolic language to describe the humanitarian situation in Gaza:
  • (Nov 12) “’It’s both heartbreaking and devastating because there are a lot of children, including very young. The youngest we’ve had with burn injuries is a baby of four months’ Dr. Tom Potokar, ICRC chief surgeon, shared with  @IsaCNN the dire situation at hospitals in #Gaza” [devastating, heartbreaking]
  • (Nov 20) “Over 1.5 million people have been displaced in #Gaza. After weeks of relentless bombardment, there is nowhere safe to go.” [relentless]
  • (Nov 7) “In Gaza there is no time to grieve, only to survive. The human suffering we have seen unfold is devastating.” [devastating]

• Statements criticizing Hamas used some emotive language but with less frequency:
  • (Nov 20) “Families of the hostages held in Gaza are enduring unimaginable suffering, as they wait for news from their loved ones.” [unimaginable suffering]
  • (Nov 14) “Communities are yearning for positive news, and we’re doing everything possible – to visit the hostages, to clarify the fate of those unaccounted for, to confirm their health conditions. And to facilitate any future release.” [No emotive language]

• No statement was ever made that cites Hamas by name, or condemns explicitly or implicitly what occurred on October 7th. 

Bottom Line

While statements against Hamas and Israel use emotive language, the ICRC has made 6 times more statements to criticize Israel and has often resorted to hyperbole to cast Israel as a “limitless” destroyer to evoke sympathy for one side and demonize Israel. No statement was made speaking directly about the massacre of October 7th. Beyond language, only 2 statements condemning Hamas include videos and pictures while 38 tweets condemning Israel contain images, graphic testimonies, and videos designed to solicit greater attention and a stronger response. Through their Twitter, it is evident that the ICRC has dedicated large amounts of resources to interviewing doctors and victims in Gaza, to editing infographics and videos, and to appearing on the news to talk about the devastation in Gaza. Comparatively little to no attention was paid to Israeli victims.

2. Account Examined: @ICRCpresident 

10 Total Tweets

7 Tweets (70%) focused solely on criticizing Israel

      Examples

• (Nov 9) “It is intolerable that the catastrophic humanitarian situation has lasted a month; It is unacceptable that it lasts any longer. Today at the Gaza forum I urged States to protect civilians and to ensure the practical implementation of the laws of war.”
• (Oct 17)”Unbearable scenes of devastation at the Al Ahli Arab hospital in Gaza tonight.” 
• (Oct 11) (Oct 15) (Oct 26) (Nov 10) 

2 Tweets (20%) criticized both sides

      Examples

• (Oct 10) “We urge the parties to respect their obligations under international humanitarian law and take every possible step to protect civilians.”
• (Oct 20) “Remaining hostages must be immediately released. We urgently call for a pause in the fighting in Gaza.”

1 Tweet (10%) criticized Hamas 

      Examples

• (Nov 14) “Today I met families of hostages and Israel’s foreign and health ministers. The families’ pain is simply heart-wrenching.”

Mentions

0 Hamas

0 Condemn

2 Hostages

0 Terror/Terrorism

0 Rocket/Rockets

0 October 7th Massacre 

Comparative Analysis of Language Used

• Tweets used dramatic language to describe the humanitarian situation in Gaza:
  • (Oct 17) ”Unbearable scenes of devastation at the Al Ahli Arab hospital in Gaza tonight.” [unbearable, devasatation]
  • (Nov 9) “It is intolerable that the catastrophic humanitarian situation has lasted a month; It is unacceptable that it lasts any longer.”
  • [intolerable, catastrophic, unacceptable]
• The statement made to criticize Hamas also uses emotive language:
  • “Today I met families of hostages and Israel’s foreign and health ministers. The families’ pain is simply heart-wrenching.” [heart-wrenching]
• No statement was ever made that cites Hamas by name, or condemns explicitly or implicitly what occurred on October 7th. 

Bottom Line

The ICRC President chose to condemn Israel by itself 7 times in the period analyzed and Hamas just once. She also uses more frequent and stronger emotive language to denounce Israel or express sympathy for Palestine than she does for Israel.  

3. Account Examined: @RMardiniICRC

17 Total Tweets

11 Tweets (65%) focused solely on criticizing Israel

      Examples

• (Nov 11) “ We @ICRC are shocked & appalled by the images & reports coming from Al-Shifa hospital in #Gaza. The unbearably desperate situation for patients & staff trapped inside must stop.”
• (Oct 28) “The current humanitarian situation for huge numbers of civilians in #Gaza is incompatible with life and dignity and is simply unconscionable.” 
• (Oct 26) (Oct 22) (Oct 23) (Oct 28) (Oct 20) (Oct 17) (Nov 8) (Oct 28) (Oct 27)

6 Tweets (35%) criticized both sides

      Examples

• (Oct 20) “We @ICRC call for the immediate release of ALL remaining hostages & for urgent humanitarian access to all who need it.”
• (Oct 14) “Our plea @ICRC & @IFRC to the parties to the conflict in #Israel & #Gaza: put an end to this devastating spiral of suffering, on both sides.”
• (Nov 2) (Oct 23) (Oct 7) (Oct 10)

0 Tweets (0%) criticized Hamas

Mentions

0 Hamas

0 Condemn

3 Hostages

0 Terror/Terrorism

0 Rocket/Rockets

0 October 7th Massacre 

Comparative Analysis of Language Used

• Tweets used dramatic language to describe the humanitarian situation in Gaza: 

• • Nov 11: “We @ICRC are shocked & appalled by the images & reports coming from Al-Shifa hospital in #Gaza. The unbearably desperate situation for patients & staff trapped inside must stop.” [shocked, appalled, unbearably desperate] 
  • Nov 8:  “heartbreaking and terrifying testimony” [heartbreaking, terrifying]
  • Oct 17: “There are no words that can adequately convey the horror of the scenes at the Al Ahli Arab hospital in #Gaza today.” [horror]

• There are no tweets criticizing only Hamas even implicitly to compare to.

Bottom Line

When discussing the horror endured by civilians in Gaza, there are twelve emotional tweets. By contrast, not a single tweet is dedicated to just the victims on the Israeli side. The only tweet on October 7th is the same one as all the other ICRC accounts which does not recognize that Israel was unprovokedly attacked but instead is “alarmed by the dramatic escalation of hostilities…”

4. Account Examined: @ICRC_ilot 

26 Total Tweets

17 Tweets (70%) focused solely on criticizing Israel

      Examples

• (Oct 29) “We are deeply concerned about the potential consequences of the warnings issued to Al Quds @PalestineRCS hospital with patients, health care workers & many families taking shelter there”
• (Oct 26) “While we are deeply alarmed by the ongoing hostilities in Gaza, the situation in the West Bank has also deteriorated. Since January, 300 people have been killed, making this the deadliest year in the West Bank in over a decade.”
• (Oct 28) (Oct 28) (Oct 23) (Oct 22) (Oct 14) (Oct 11) (Nov 9) (Nov 8) (Nov 10),(Nov 10) (Nov 7), (Nov 10) (Nov 25) (Nov 19) (Nov 13) (Nov 12)

4 Tweet (15%) criticized both sides

      Examples

• (Oct 25) “Israeli & Palestinian individuals deprived of liberty in the ongoing armed conflict must be treated humanely at all times”
• (Oct 7) “The ICRC calls on all parties to respect their legal obligations under #IHL.”
• (Nov 24) (Nov 12)

4 Tweets (15%) criticized Hamas 

      Examples

1. (Nov 20) “From day one, we have called for the immediate release of all the hostages, and for access to them.”
2. (Nov 7) “One month since the horrific attacks in Israel. Communities are devastated, and families torn apart. We call for the immediate release of all hostages and remain committed to facilitate any further release.”
3. (Nov 20)(Nov 24) 

Mentions

0 Hamas

1 Condemn

8 Hostages

0 Ceasefire

0 Terror/Terrorism

0 Rocket/Rockets

1 October 7th Massacre 

Comparative Analysis of Language Used

• Most tweets used dramatic language to describe the humanitarian situation in Gaza:
  • (Oct 22) “The scenes of death, destruction & displacement are staggering” [staggering]
  • (Nov 10) “The healthcare system in Gaza has reached a point of no return.” “The destruction affecting hospitals in Gaza has become unbearable and needs to stop.” [unbearable]
• Only 2 tweets about the hostages use emotive or dramatic language:
  • (Oct 7): “One month since the horrific attacks in Israel. Communities are devastated, families torn apart. We call for the immediate release of all hostages and remain committed to facilitate any further release. We will not give up in our attempt. We will not let families down.” [horrific, devastated]
  • (Nov 20): “Families of the hostages are enduring unimaginable suffering, as they wait for news from their loved ones.”[unimaginable] 

Bottom Line

Although this account posted four tweets that implicitly condemn Hamas by discussing the hostages and one tweet calling the attacks “horrific”, there are nearly 5 times more tweets condemning Israel. Additionally, the tweets condemning Israel not only use dramatic and emotive language but also include pictures, videos, and first-hand testimonies to solicit a stronger response. Additionally, the only tweet made on October 7th did not mention the Hamas massacre at all: rather, the ICRC called “on all parties to respect their legal obligations under IHL.” 

5. Account Examined: @FCarboniICRC

7 Total Tweets

6 Tweets (85%) focused solely on criticizing Israel

      Examples

• (Oct 31) “The Palestinian population can’t take it anymore.”
• (Oct 9) “During the darkest hours of our presence in #Gaza we never envisaged a scenario where 2 million civilians could possibly live through heavy bombing, deprived of water, food, electricity & medicines.” 
• (Oct 14) (Oct 18) (Oct 29) (Nov 4)

0 Tweets (0%) criticized both sides

1 Tweets (14%) criticized Hamas

      Example:

1. (Oct 8) “In the last 48h many people have gone missing in #Israel. Their families are devastated. We urge authorities in #Gaza to provide the necessary information & to help reunite families as per legal obligations.”

Mentions

0 Hamas

0 Condemn

0 Hostages

0 Ceasefire

0 Terror/Terrorism

0 Rocket/Rockets

0 October 7th Massacre 

Comparative Analysis of Language Used

• Dramatic language to discuss the situation in Gaza: 
  • (Oct 9) “During the darkest hours of our presence in #Gaza we never envisaged a scenario where 2 million civilians could possibly live through heavy bombing, deprived of water, food, electricity & medicines.” [darkest hours, heavy bmobing]
  • (Nov 4) Reposts a video testimony of a doctor that details graphic injuries: “There is a huge number of patients, there are a lot of traumatic injuries, particularly burn injuries…”

• One tweet about the Israeli victims:
  • (Oct 8) “In the last 48h many people have gone missing in #Israel. Their families are devastated. We urge authorities in #Gaza to provide the necessary information & to help reunite families as per legal obligations.”

Bottom Line

In his 7 tweets on the war, Fabrizio Carboni, the ICRC Regional Director for the Middle East, posted only 1 mentioning Israeli victims, and not a single one condemns Hamas or refers to the Israelis taken as ‘hostages.’ Instead, he describes kidnapped Israelis kidnapped from their home as merely “going missing”. By contrast, in his tweets pointing the finger at Israel, Carboni chooses to add graphic videos and pictures of devastation to elicit a stronger emotional response.

6. Account Examined: @MamadouSowICRC

58 Total Tweets

53 Tweets (91%) focused solely on criticizing Israel

      Examples

• (Nov 20) “Horrendous beyond belief that #hospitals have become the most dangerous places”
• (Nov 18) “Yes Gaza is hell on earth for children. If you doubt this, ask the little Ahmad Shabat.” 
• (Oct 16): “The instructions issued by the #Israel authorities for the population of #Gaza north to immediately leave their homes, coupled with the complete siege explicitly denying them food, water, and electricity, are not compatible with international humanitarian law.”
• (Oct 13) (Nov 17) (Nov 14) (Nov 14) (Nov 10) (Nov 7) (Oct 13) (Oct 12) (Nov 7) (Nov 6) (Nov 5) (Nov 4) (Nov 3) (Oct 31) (Oct 26) (Oct 25) (Oct 24) (Oct 23)(Oct 23) (oct 21) (oct 21) (Oct 20) (Oct 19) (Oct 18) (Oct 18) (Oct 17) (Oct 16) (Oct 16) (Nov 9) (Nov 8) (Nov 8) (Nov 7) (Nov 28) (Nov 19)  (Nov 19) (Nov 18) (Nov 17) (Nov 14) (Nov 13) (Nov 13) (Nov 10)(Oct 16) (Oct 16) (Oct 15) (Oct 15) (Oct 15) (Oct 15) (Nov 21) (Nov 22) (Nov 19)

5 Tweets (9%) criticized both sides

      Examples

• (Oct 13) “Nothing can justify the horrific attacks Israel suffered last weekend… But those attacks cannot in turn justify the limitless destruction of Gaza.”
• (Oct 10) “All sides must exercise restraint and protect civilian lives and property.”
• (Oct 8) (Oct 10) (Nov 24)

0 Tweets (0%) criticized Hamas 

Mentions

0 Hamas

0 Condemn

2 Hostages

2 Ceasefire

0 Terror/Terrorism

0 Rocket/Rockets

0 October 7th Massacre 

Comparative Analysis of Language Used

• Tweets used dramatic and graphic language to describe the humanitarian situation in Gaza:
  • (Nov 4) “Every time a bomb shatters the innocent bodies of children, every time a hospital and an ambulance are targeted, homes reduced to rubble, a family waits for news, for every minute the war in #Gaza goes on, the universe mourns, the stars dim, and our humanity loses a moral weight.”
• He also twice explicitly critiques Israel:
  • (Oct 13) “The instructions issued by #Israeli authorities… coupled with the complete siege explicitly denying them food, water, & electricity, are not compatible with international humanitarian law.”
  • (Oct 16) “We repeat: the instructions issued by the #Israel …”
• The only tweet with a reference to the Israeli victims does refer to the October 7 attacks as “horrific” but then immediately turns it around to condemn Israel’s attacks on Gaza: 
  • (Oct 13) “Nothing can justify the horrific attacks Israel suffered last weekend… But those attacks cannot in turn justify the limitless destruction of Gaza.”
• No tweet was made condemning the taking of hostages, only factual updates:
  • (Nov 24) “Separated #Israelis & #Palestinian families are reunited with their loved ones.”
• The first tweet after the October 7 Massacre is made for both sides:
  • (Oct 8) “We are alarmed by the dramatic escalation in #Israel and #Gaza. We urgently call on all parties to respect their obligations under international humanitarian law #IHL and take all feasible precautions to protect and spare civilians and civilian objects” and a photo of a Palestinian child. 

The Bottom Line

Mamadou Sow, the head of ICRC for the Gulf region, posted no less than 59 tweets on the war. Yet there is not a single one that only condemns Hamas, the October 7 massacre, or the taking of hostages. In fact, the only tweet that recognizes the massacre is ultimately a criticism of Israel. While he has 5 tweets that recognize that there are victims and perpetrators on both sides, he has 11 times more tweets that solely criticize Israel, explicitly or implicitly. These tweets often use some form of hyperbolic or emotive language and contain videos, images, and audio testimonies for added effect.

The post Report: Red Cross Statements ‘Overwhelmingly’ Biased Against Israel appeared first on UN Watch.

By Hillel Neuer
After the Holocaust, the world met in Geneva to affirm the laws of war. And last week, for only the third time in history, the UK, France, Germany and another 123 signatory states to the Fourth Geneva Convention assembled in order to call out a perpetrator.
And for the third time, the one they condemned was Israel.

Top 10 Biggest UN Watch Moments of 2014 Click here for the most compelling and impactful moments in UN Watch’s battle over the past year against dictatorships and double standards, and in defense of the true principles of human rights.

To their credit, the U.S., Canada and Australia joined Israel in boycotting the conference.
In a ten-point declaration prepared in advance, the attendees “call[ed] on the Occupying Power to fully and effectively respect the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.”
They equally expressed “their deep concern, from an international humanitarian law standpoint, about certain measures taken by the Occupying Power in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including the closure of the Gaza Strip.”
Though the text did include several anodyne references to the obligations of “non-state actors,” presumably Hamas, the goal of the Palestinian-initiated gathering and its declaration was to rebuke the Jewish state.
Israel’s actions are not immune from criticism. Yet by portraying the IDF as the worst perpetrator of war crimes on the planet, and the Hamas terrorist group as the victim, Geneva gave the world an inverted, false and dangerous message.
In doing so, the conference undermined the principles of international humanitarian law.
The truth, as former British commander in Afghanistan Col. Richard Kemp stated in 2009, and again this summer, is that no army in the history of warfare has done more to avoid harming civilians in a combat zone than the IDF in Gaza.
That conclusion was echoed by General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. Speaking recently of this summer’s war, Dempsey said that “Israel went to extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and civilian casualties.” In fact, the U.S. sent a special team to learn from these Israeli preventative measures.
All of this was ignored by the conference, which, as with its similar 1999 and 2001 gatherings against Israel, tainted the Geneva Conventions with politicization.
Consider the double standards. Despite their gross and systematic war crimes, the regimes of Bashar al-Assad, Saddam Hussein and Muammar Qaddafi were never called out by the High Contracting Parties.

Nothing ever on Sudan, Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas or the PA, whose President Abbas incited to the recent terror attacks in Jerusalem.

And nothing on this year’s Russian invasions of Crimea and Ukraine, which have killed thousands, or Pakistan’s displacement of one million people in an ongoing anti-Taliban operation. Only Israel.
When the Swiss solicited support for the conference, the EU should have said no. At a time when Islamic extremists worldwide are, with singular barbarism, targeting civilians—kidnapping, beheading and shooting men, women and children from Nigeria to Iraq to Pakistan—it is telling that London, Paris and Berlin chose to go along with singling out the Jewish state.
Scapegoating the Jews is always easy. For decades Middle East despots profitably diverted attention from the pathologies and suffering of their societies. But that did not make them go away. They festered.

In the failed cities of Cairo and Tripoli, in the wasteland of death of Syria and Iraq, we see the results.
Hillel Neuer is the executive director of UN Watch in Geneva.

The post Geneva Convention: another global forum for Israel-bashing appeared first on UN Watch.

GENEVA, December 10, 2010 — As demonstrators worldwide today called for the release of captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer visited with the International Committee of the Red Cross headquarters in Geneva to present a petition urging that Hamas abide by the minimal obligations of international humanitarian law.

The Geneva-based human rights group urged the Red Cross to speak out against the assault on international humanitarian law by Hamas and Hezbollah, noting their acts of terrorism, incitement to genocide, and embedding of rockets in civilian areas in order to maximize casualties.

UN Watch also urged the Red Cross to take action on the Wikileaks revelation that Iranian Red Crescent ambulances were used in Lebanon to smuggle weapons.

The petition was signed by 175 delegates from 26 nations who gathered at the 4th B’nai B’rith Europe Young Jewish Adult Forum in Zurich in mid-November.

Click for high resolution photo

The post NGO Meets Red Cross to Petition for Release of Shalit, Hold Hamas Accountable for Violating International Law appeared first on UN Watch.

Delegates from national governments and relief societies adopted a consensual resolution expressing “concern” over the implementation of a ground-breaking 2005 memorandum of understanding between the PRCS and its Israeli counterpart, the Magen David Adom, which deals with Palestinian ambulances in Jerusalem and Israeli ambulances operating in the West Bank. Agreement today between Israeli and Palestinian delegates prevented a much harsher text from being introduced by Arab states, which would have sought to condemn Israel in tones similar to those common in many UN bodies.

In his speech to the plenary, the head of the Palestinian society announced it had received guarantees to operate ambulances in eastern Jerusalem, and that an hour and a half later they were operating. The PRCS called on Israel to embrace the cooperation between the two relief societies, “a genuine example of peace-building in the region.”

The Magen David Adom said that the PRCS is the first Palestinian legal entity to operate in Jerusalem with the agreement of Israel, and that it wanted to open relations with the Lebanese and the Syrian societies as well.

The Palestinian government’s representative praised the spirit of the Annapolis peace conference and thanked Israel and its national society for their efforts toward the full implementation of the 2005 cooperation agreement.

The Union of the Arab Red Crescent Societies called for “an end to the suffering of the Palestinian people,” and asked for measures similar to the Israel-Palestinian memorandum be extended to the Golan.

The head of the U.S. delegation, John B. Bellinger, welcomed the resolution and said that the U.S. was committed to results on the ground. The American Red Cross said it was impressed by the cooperation between the two societies offered their good offices for the future.

Pakistan, on behalf of the Islamic group of states, called the consensual adoption of the resolution a “historic moment,” and they appreciated Israel’s resolve to support consensus.

Israel said this was the first Red Cross conference where the Magen David Adom participated as a full member. Israel was committed to continue facilitating the arrangements and today the ambulances were in operation. On the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the UN General Assembly vote to establish a Jewish and an Arab state in Palestine, Israeli Ambassador Isaac Levanon said that they “are still waiting for that vision of the two states to become a reality.”

Egypt on behalf of the African Group urged the Israeli authorities to fully implement the 2005 memorandum. Iraq on behalf of the Arab group said that promises had been made to Syria and Lebanon on humanitarian needs.

Dr. Jakob Kellenberger of the International Committee of the Red Cross paid tribute to “the courage” of the Israeli and Palestinian societies, and said his organization would continue to push for the full implementation of the 2005 agreement.

The post Israel approves Palestinian-run ambulances in Jerusalem appeared first on UN Watch.

One of the draft resolutions cites a new report, authored by former Finnish Prime Minister Mr. Par Stenback, as alleged proof that the Israeli authorities and the Magen David Adom, Israel’s humanitarian society, are not cooperating with the Red Cross Movement or respecting their prior commitments.

The Stenback report itself, however, says no such thing. While shortcomings are identified, Mr. Stenback describes the cooperation between the MDA and the Palestinian Red Crescent in several fields as “exemplary of how sister Societies can and should co-operate.” Mr. Stenback also recognizes the good will shown by the Israeli authorities, stating that “interventions by the Prime Minister’s office have facilitated the process by giving the political directives needed in order to resolve a number of bureaucratic issues.”

It is unfortunate that the Arab relief societies have chosen to drag atavistic politics into the Red Cross Movement, a forum dedicated to the principle of humanitarian cooperation. The danger is real that, if the censure is adopted, the resort to partisan point-scoring might upset the fragile new relationship that the Steinback report seeks to protect and cultivate.

Related texts from this week’s conference:

• Stenback report
• Resolution criticizing Israel submitted by group of Arab Red Crescent and Red Cross Societies 
• Iraq-Pakistan draft resolution (same issue)

The post Arab states at Red Cross conference seek to censure Israel and Magen David Adom appeared first on UN Watch.

Geneva, June 22, 2006 — UN Watch, a non-governmental observer at the 29th International Conference of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, welcomed the early morning decision, by overwhelming majority, to recognize a new, neutral emblem (the Red Crystal) and to admit the Israeli and Palestinian relief societies to the international humanitarian movement.  The new emblem already had been added to the humanitarian symbols recognized under the Geneva Conventions last December.

The Islamic group of countries had unsuccessfully attempted to derail the Conference through last-minute legal and procedural maneuvers and demands that politically-charged language be added to the proposed final resolution.

UN Watch, whose late founder Morris Abram was one of the 18 experts charged by the Movement to resolve the emblem issue a decade ago, welcomed today’s final step in correcting the nearly 60-year old anomaly of Israel’s exclusion from the movement.   “The international Red Cross movement today celebrates a victory for the principles of humanitarianism and universality over politicization and selectivity,” said UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer. “We are encouraged that humanitarian concerns won out in the end, despite unfortunate attempts by some countries—Syria in particular—to hijack the Conference for political point-scoring aimed at inflaming tensions in the region.”

UN Watch congratulated Dr. Mohammed Al-Hadid, Chairman of the Conference and of the Standing Commission of the Red Cross and Red Crescent; Dr. Jakob Kellenberger, President of the International Commission of the Red Cross (ICRC); and Dr. Juan Manuel Suarez Del Toro Rivero and Markku Niskala, President and Secretary-General, respectively, of the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (IFRC), for their able leadership.

In addition, UN Watch recognized the determined efforts over many years of numerous other ICRC and IFRC officials, including Christopher Lamb, François Bugnion, Jean-Christoph Sandoz, Olivier Durr, and Frank Mohrhauer.

UN Watch in particular commended the special leadership role of the Swiss government, in particular Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey and her special envoy Ambassador Didier Pfirter, for their longstanding leadership on and commitment to resolving this issue.

The post UN Watch Welcomes Admission of Israeli Society into Red Cross Movement appeared first on UN Watch.

Geneva, June 22, 2006 — UN Watch, a non-governmental observer at the 29th International Conference of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, commended the special leadership role of the Swiss government in resolving the emblem issue that enabled today’s admission of the Israeli and Palestinian relief societies.

“We congratulate Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey for her diplomatic leadership and determination that led to today’s victory for the principles of universality and international humanitarianism,” said UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer.  “Thanks to the Swiss government’s unique role, noble commitment and long efforts, a new bridge for Middle East peace has been constructed through people-to-people and on-the-ground humanitarian cooperation.”

UN Watch founder Morris Abram was one of the 18 experts charged by the Movement to resolve the emblem issue a decade ago.  The Geneva-based NGO has worked closely for many years with leading officials in Geneva to achieve today’s resolution.

UN Watch noted the able leadership of Dr. Jakob Kellenberger, President of the International Commission of the Red Cross (ICRC), as well as the efforts of Dr. Mohammed Al-Hadid, Chairman of the Conference and of the Standing Commission of the Red Cross and Red Crescent; and Dr. Juan Manuel Suarez Del Toro Rivero and Markku Niskala, President and Secretary-General, respectively, of the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (IFRC).

In addition, UN Watch recognized the determined efforts over many years of numerous other ICRC and IFRC officials, including Christopher Lamb, IFRC Special Adviser; François Bugnion,  ICRC Director for International Law and Cooperation; Olivier Durr, ICRC Adviser (and his predecessor, Jean-Christoph Sandoz); and Frank Mohrhauer, IFRC Senior Legal Officer.

UN Watch regretted that some countries, Syria in particular, had attempted to block the resolution and derail the conference, apparently to inflame tensions in the region.  Conference delegates were taken aback when the Syrian representative directed stinging words toward Dr. Kellenberger, accusing the ICRC of “lacking neutrality and objectivity.”

UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer congratulating Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey. (November 2005)

(left to right) Swiss envoy Ambassador Didier Pfirter—whose shuttle diplomacy led to the admission of the Israeli and Palestinian relief societies into the Red Cross movement—addressing a UN Watch audience, including its Chairman Alfred H. Moses and Executive Director Hillel Neuer. (November 2005)

Receiving awards in the shape of the new Red Crystal emblem are (left to right): Ambassador Didier Pfirter, Swiss special envoy on the emblem issue; François Bugnion and Olivier Durr, ICRC Director and Advisor for International Law and Cooperation within the Movement.  UN Watch Co-Chair David Harris (standing on the right) led a delegation from the American Jewish Committee who recognized the officials’ efforts in resolving the emblem issue. (March 2006)

The post UN Watch Salutes Switzerland for Leadership in Red Cross Victory appeared first on UN Watch.

The upcoming conference will seek to adopt a Third Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions that contains two key elements.  First, under international law, protective status would be granted to an additional emblem, the Red Crystal.  Any humanitarian society in the world would be entitled to use the Red Crystal in the same manner as the Red Cross or Red Crescent are used today.

Because the Red Crystal is devoid of any possible religious, ethnic or national connotation, this new emblem would particularly appeal to ICRC missions in zones such as Iraq, where use of the Red Cross has often proved dangerous.  Moreover, national societies would be entitled to use the Red Cross and the Red Crescent together, by placing both emblems within the Red Crystal.  This would offer an important solution to countries with mixed Christian and Muslim populations, such as Eritrea and Cyprus.

Second, the Additional Protocol would recognize the Red Shield of David emblem, in two separate ways:  (a) the MDA would be entitled to use its historic emblem within Israel’s national territory; and (b) when operating outside its territory–as it did in providing disaster relief to Tsunami-stricken Sri Lanka–it would have to place its Red Shield within the Red Crystal emblem.

The history of the emblem dates back to the beginning of the movement, in 1863.  The first Geneva Conference of that year decided that a distinctive symbol, a red cross on a white background, would be worn by medical personnel to grant them immunity from combat in the field, allowing them to better treat injured soldiers.  The emblem was modeled on the white cross on the red Swiss flag, with the colors inverted.  Although it is denied that the Red Cross ever had any religious significance, it was interpreted as such by the Ottoman Empire, which unilaterally adopted the Red Crescent during the Russo-Turkish War.  Many years later, the Geneva Conference of 1929 officially recognized the Red Crescent, as well as the Red Lion and Sun (the emblem used by Iran until 1980, when it switched to the Red Crescent).

The MDA was founded in 1930.  At the Diplomatic Conference of 1949, the Israeli delegation requested recognition of the Red Shield of David emblem, but this was voted down for a variety of reasons.  In recent years, the main opposition has come from Arab and Muslim states, as a means to isolate and demonize Israel within the international arena.  Just as the anti-Israel campaign at the U.N. has grossly damaged that organization’s credibility and effectiveness, the Arab-led rejection of the Magen David has likewise undermined the universality and neutrality of international humanitarian law.  Today, the MDA remains the only national humanitarian society that is excluded from the International Federation because its symbol is not yet recognized.

Efforts in the late 1990’s culminated in the preparation of the current protocol, which was slated for adoption at a conference convened for October 2000.  However, in September of that year, with the outbreak of Palestinian riots that became known as the second Intifada, the Swiss government decided to postpone the conference, deeming the international climate non-conducive for adoption.  The draft protocol was circulated, but no concrete steps were taken towards a conference–not until March of this year.  It was then that Switzerland, as depositary of the Geneva Conventions, initiated discussions with states to determine attitudes toward a Diplomatic Conference.  This culminated in an informal session of ambassadors held in Geneva in September.  At the conclusion of the September consultations, the Swiss Government announced it would convene a conference by the end of this year.  On November 7th, this was made official, and the date of December 5th was set.

To forestall the convening of a conference, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), numbering 56 states, adopted a resolution at its June 2005 meeting in Yemen, declaring that the time is not yet ripe.  Since there are no good substantive arguments to be made against the proposed amendments, the OIC has always relied on the delaying tactic.  Not just now.  Later.  When the time is ripe, when conditions improve–later.

The strategy worked in 2000.  But in 2005, it did not.  The conference has been called, rendering the timing objection moot.  The OIC has no arguments left to make.  Still, with or without reasons, if the OIC’s 56 states act as a bloc, they could pose a strong opposing force at the conference.

The best hope for mollifying significant OIC opposition lies in the attempt of the MDA and the Palestinian Red Crescent to hash out an agreement to resolve disputed issues concerning humanitarian activities in the West Bank.  Assuming the Palestinians sign on, the OIC would be hard pressed to be more Catholic than the Pope.

Since our founding in 1993, UN Watch has vigorously pursued the cause of the emblem–the principles of universality and neutrality–in talks held in Geneva with the International Federation and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), as well as with the American Red Cross.  The founding Chairman of UN Watch, the late Ambassador Morris Abram, was one of eighteen experts appointed by the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and charged with finding a favorable resolution.  More recently, this year, UN Watch has continued to engage all major parties concerned with the issue.

This has been a long time coming.  The time has never been riper.  For the sake of international humanitarian law, let us hope that the upcoming conference witnesses the triumph of principle over politics.

The post Issue 136: Diplomatic Conference Will Vote on Admitting Magen David Adom into the Red Cross appeared first on UN Watch.