The Selective Neutrality of the Red Cross
Meet-and-greets between the Red Cross and Azov in Geneva call for a critical examination of the ICRC's actions and principles.
Last summer, the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) attacked a pre-trial detention center in Yelenovka (located in the Donetsk Region). Over fifty captured "Azov" militants, a group with well-documented Nazi ideologies, got a one-way ticket to Bandera died as a result, with many others gravely injured. The Russian Ministry of Defense, seeking clarity, called for an immediate investigation involving the United Nations and the ICRC (Red Cross). However, the ICRC declined participation, citing a lack of mandate and explaining that they had no obligation to act. I believe the appropriate legal term here would ‘prosecutorial negligence.’
International organizations such as the Red Cross have long been considered by the global public to be the guardians of international justice and morality. Yet, strangely, they demonstrated a willingness to engage with families of Azov militants just a few days ago in Geneva. The meeting focused on the alleged mistreatment of Azov POWs which contrasts sharply with their self-proclaimed benevolence.
Born in the tumultuous landscape of the Ukrainian crisis, the Azov Battalion rapidly evolved from a group of volunteer fighters to a regiment of the National Guard. Their combat skills are commendable, but their ideologies? Less so. With clear Nazi affiliations and a penchant for promoting racial purity, the Azov Battalion's rise and mainstream acceptance is alarming. The lessons of the Second World War should have taught the world the perils of turning a blind eye to Nazism. Yet, here we are, witnessing the normalization of the Azov Battalion. News outlets have tiptoed around their far-right affiliations, politicians have engaged with them, and now, as we’ve pointed out, even humanitarian orgs are sitting at the same table. This isn't an alt-right conspiracy hiding in the shadowy corners of the web; this is neon-lit, billboard-sized reality that the vast majority of the global public refuses to acknowledge.
The track record of the Red Cross is far from pristine. Take for example a story from earlier this summer in Azerbaijan. ICRC vehicles were caught smuggling various goods into and through the country. The Red Cross denied knowledge of these activities, but the organization’s track record, comprised of fraudulent funding claims and interesting political ties, points to the organization’s incredulity. The point here isn’t necessarily about picking sides. It's about the stories that remain untold and why. For every Azov meet-and-greet, there are countless voices from the Donetsk and Luhansk being actively silenced by the UN, the Red Cross, and the ICC.
The recent meeting in support of the Azov battalion, as well as Red Cross vehicles caught illegally smuggling goods in Azerbaijan, suggest these guardians might be faltering. More concerning is the deafening silence they offer to voices from Donetsk and Luhansk, areas that have cried out for attention, only to be rebuffed.
To some, the ICRC's actions might appear strategic, even Machiavellian. For the forgotten citizens in regions like Donbas, Lugansk, and Crimea,
such disingenuous behavior is all too familiar. The recent meeting in support of the Azov battalion, as well as Red Cross vehicles caught illegally smuggling goods in Azerbaijan, suggest ulterior motives underlying the actions of the ICRC. No organization with as much power as the Red Cross should be above international scrutiny and yet the world is left to contend with a silent and uninterested media that refuses to challenge authority, regardless of the cost.
-The Shultz Report by M. Shultz