Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 January 2010
Soon after the First World War the ICRC proposed that the Geneva Convention be revised on the basis of experience of that conflict. It had the question included on the agenda of the Tenth and Eleventh International Conferences of the Red Cross in Geneva, in 1921 and 1923.
89 Onzième Conference internationale de la Croix-Rouge, Geneva, 1923, Compte rendu, pp. 143 and 181–183.
90 See: Actes de la Conference diplomatique convoquée par le Conseil fédéral suisse pour la Révision de la Convention du 6 juillet 1906 pour l'Amélioration du Sort des Blessés et Malades dans les Armées en Campagne, et pour l'Elaboration d'une Convention relative au Traitement des Prisonniers de Guerre, réunie à Genève du 1er au 27 juillet 1929, Geneva, Imprimerie du Journal de Genève, 1930 (hereafter referred to as Actes 1929).
91 idem, pp. 247–254.
92 idem, pp. 247–248.
93 idem, pp. 248–249.
94 idem, pp. 248–250.
95 idem, p, 250.
96 Ibid.
97 idem, pp. 251 and 253.
98 It is true that the ICRC was not entirely free from responsibility. On the basis of the tolerance displayed at the 1906 and 1907 Conferences, it had recognized the Egyptian Red Crescent and the Persian Red Lion and Sun in 1924. Our research has revealed no reason for that decision which, to some extent, was a departure from the line of conduct previously followed by the International Committee.
99 Actes 1929, p. 251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
100 Actes 1929, p. 666 Google Scholar; The Laws of Armed Conflicts, p. 252.Google Scholar
101 Actes 1929, p. 615.Google Scholar
102 Only six years later, Afghanistan asked the ICRC to recognize the Red Archway Society (Mehrab-e-Ahmar); see chapter II below.
Moreover, in May 1931, the Society of the Red Shield of David applied to the ICRC for recognition, but as it was not constituted on the territory of an independent State the ICRC could not do so. It replied to that effect on 28 July 1931, drawing the attention of the Society to the fact that the emblem chosen would be an obstacle to its recognition later on. There the matter rested until 1948. See Chapter II below.
103 paul Des Gouttes: La Convention de Genève pour l'amélioration du Sort des Blessés et Malades dans les Armées en Campagne du 27 juillet 1929, Commentaire, Geneva, ICRC, 1930, p. 144.Google Scholar
104 idem, p. 145.
105 Ibid.
106 See: XVIth International Red Cross Conference, London, June 1938, Doc. No. 11a: ICRC: Report on the Interpretation, Revision and Extension of the Geneva Convention of July 27, 1929. See also Revue internationale de la Croix-Rouge, No. 231, 03 1938, pp. 193–244.Google Scholar
107 Report on the Interpretation.… p. 24 and Revue…, 1938, pp. 215–216 Google Scholar. See also P. Des Gouttes: “Projet de révision de la Convention de Genève du 27 juillet 1929 présenté aux Sociétés nationales de la Croix-Rouge par le Comité international de la Croix-Rouge”. Revue internationale de la Croix-Rouge, 19th year, N. 223, July 1937, pp. 645–681, especially p. 658.
108 Report on the Interpretation…, p. 24 Google Scholar. Revue… 1938, pp. 215–216.
109 See Sixteenth International Red Cross Conference, Resolution No. X in Compte rendu de la Seizième Conference Internationale de la Croix-Rouge, London, 1938, p. 103.Google Scholar
110 The 1937 draft remained a dead letter. Nevertheless, the incident was not insignificant. Since 1949 the ICRC has often been accused of partiality because of its opposition to the admission of new signs, especially of the red shield of David as requested by Israel. Documents prove that the stand taken by the ICRC in 1937, when the question of the Red Shield of David had not officially been raised, was the same then as now.
111 Memo sent by the ICRC to the governments of States parties to the Geneva Conventions and to National Red Cross Societies, Geneva, 15 February 1945, for which see Revue international de la Croix-Rouge, No. 314, 02 1945, pp. 85–89.Google Scholar
112 See: Report on the Work of the Preliminary Conference of National Red Cross Societies for the Study of the Conventions and of various problems relative to the Red Cross, Geneva, ICRC, 1947.Google Scholar
113 idem, pp. 43–44.
114 idem, pp. 44.
115 See: Report on the Work of the Conference of Government Experts for the Study of the Conventions for the Protection of War Victims, Geneva, ICRC, 1947.Google Scholar
116 idem, pp. 47–48.
117 See: XVIIth International Red Cross Conference, (Stockholm, August 1948); Document No. 4a: Draft Revised or New Conventions for the Protection of War Victims, Geneva, ICRC, 05 1948.Google Scholar
118 idem, p. 23.
119 See: “Draft International Conventions for the Protection of War Victims as approved by the XVIIth International Red Cross Conference in Stockholm, August 1948” (taken as basis for discussion at the Diplomatic Conference), reproduced in Final Record of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva of 1949, Berne, Federal Political Department, vol. I, pp. 47–143, and particularly p. 53.
120 Revised and New Draft Conventions for the Protection of War Victims, Remarks and Proposals submitted by the International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva, ICRC 02 1949.Google Scholar
121 idem, pp. 15–17. For these proposals and their discussion see p. 240 below.
122 See Final Record of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva of 1949, Berne, Federal Political Department, 4 volumes (hereafter referred to as Final Record 1949).
123 On 16 and 17 May 1949. See Final Record 1949, vol. II A, p. 89–92.Google Scholar
124 idem, p. 89.
126 idem, pp. 90–92.
126 idem, p. 91. These proposals had already been set forth and developed by Jean S. Pictet in: The Sign of the Red Cross, Geneva, ICRC, 1949 Google Scholar, and in: Revised and New Draft Conventions for the Protection of War Victims, Remarks and Proposals submitted by the International Committee of the Red Cross, pp. 15–17.Google Scholar
127 Final Record 1949, vol. II A, p. 91 Google Scholar. The address by Mr. Bammate, Delegate for Afghanistan, is reproduced in full in: Paul de La Pradelle: La Conférence diplomatique et les nouvelles Conventions de Genève du 12 août 1949, Paris, les Editions Internationales, 1951, Annex VIII, pp. 406–410.
128 The Laws of Armed Conflicts, p. 257.Google Scholar
129 Final Record 1949, vol. III, p. 40.Google Scholar
130 Final Record 1949, vol. II A, p. 92.Google Scholar
131 Ibid.
132 Ibid.
133 On 23 June 1949. See Final Record 1949, vol. II A, pp. 150–151.Google Scholar
134 idem, p. 150.
136 idem, pp. 150–151.
136 idem, p. 150.
137 idem, pp. 150–151.
138 idem, p. 151.
139 idem, p. 187.
140 On 21 July 1949. See Final Record 1949, vol. II B, pp. 223–232.Google Scholar
141 See above, pp. 241–242.
142 Final Record 1949, vol. II B, p. 223.Google Scholar
143 Ibid.
144 idem, p. 224.
145 idem, p. 225.
146 Ibid.
147 idem, pp. 224–227.
148 idem, p. 227.
149 Ibid.
150 idem, pp. 227–228.
151 idem, pp. 228–229.
152 idem. p. 229.
153 idem, pp. 229–230.
154 idem, p. 230.
155 Ibid.
156 Ibid.
157 idem, pp. 231–232.
158 On 25 July 1949. See Final Record 1949, vol. II B, pp. 255–262.
159 idem, pp. 255–258.
160 idem, pp. 258–262.
161 idem, p. 262.
162 On 2 August 1949. See Final Record 1949, vol. II B, 393–395.Google Scholar
163 idem, pp. 394.
164 idem, pp. 394–395.
165 On 9 August 1949. See Final Record 1949, vol. II B, pp. 518–519.Google Scholar
166 For the Nicaraguan draft resolution and accompanying sketches, see Final Record 1949, vol. III, pp. 177–179.Google Scholar
167 Final Record 1949, vol. II B, pp. 518–519.Google Scholar
168 See supra p. 171 Google Scholar (Review of April); Final Record 1949, vol. I, p. 213 Google Scholar; International Red Cross Handbook, pp. 43–44 Google Scholar; The Laws of Armed Conflicts, p. 310.Google Scholar
169 Final Record 1949, vol. II B, pp. 519–520 Google Scholar (the Third Convention for the protection of prisoners of war does not mention the distinctive sign).
170 Idem, p. 534; for the Israeli reservation see Final Record 1949, vol. I. p. 348.Google Scholar
171 Final Record 1949, vol. II B, p. 534 Google Scholar. However, so far as we know, Lebanon did not confirm its opposition when Israel deposited its instruments of ratification.
172 Département Politique Fédéral: Procès-verbal du Dépôt de quatre instruments portant ratification par Israël, Berne, 6 07 1951 Google Scholar; and The Laws of Armed Conflicts, pp. 494–495.Google Scholar
173 See p. 234 above.
174 See, for example, the statement made by Prof. Riad to the 1929 Conference: Actes 1929, p. 250.Google Scholar
175 This contradiction was mentioned by the Syrian delegate: Final Record 1949, vol. II B, pp. 227–228.Google Scholar
176 Final Record 1949, vol. II B, pp. 226–227.Google Scholar
177 This was pointed out by the Burma delegate. See Final Record 1949, vol. II B, p. 227.Google Scholar
178 See statement by the Belgian delegate: Final Record 1949, vol. II A, p. 92.Google Scholar
179 See statement by the Mexican delegate: Final Record 1949, vol. II B, p. 230.Google Scholar
180 See statement by the French delegate: Final Record 1949, vol. II B, pp. 228–229.Google Scholar
181 Final Record 1949, vol. II A, pp. 150–151.Google Scholar
182 Letter from President of the ICRC to H.I.M. Mohammed Reza Pahlevi, Shahinshah of Iran, dated 25 October 1962.
183 See International Red Cross Council of Delegates, agenda item 5: Report on the World Red Cross Conference on Peace, Doc.CD/5/1, p. 10, and also: World Red Cross Conference on Peace, agenda item 3.1.a: Report submitted by the Ethiopian Red Cross.
184 Conference of Government Experts on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts, First Session, Report on the Work of the Conference, Geneva, ICRC, 08 1971 Google Scholar, paras. 67, 68, 280 and 281, and Second Session, Report on the Work of the Conference, ICRC, 07 1972, vol. I Google Scholar, paras. 1.62, 2.381 and 2.382.
185 Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts, Second Session, Table of Amendments (mimeo.), Doc. CDDH/225, 15 12 1975, p. 6 (original: English).Google Scholar
