More

Red Cross Under Fire For Teaching First Aid To Taliban

Taliban

FRANK JORDANS   05/26/10 02:17 PM ET   AP

GENEVA — The international Red Cross said Wednesday it would continue giving first aid training and kits to Taliban fighters in Afghanistan, despite drawing angry e-mails from around the world and criticism from an Afghan official after the practice was publicized.

The International Committee of the Red Cross trained "over 70 members of the armed opposition" in first aid last month, along with more than 100 Afghan police and civilians, including taxi drivers.

The courses started in 2006 and the neutral group will continue as long as they are needed, said Red Cross spokesman Christian Cardon.

"It's the core of the ICRC's mandate to make sure that people are cured whether they are from one side or the other side," he told The Associated Press.

Britain's Guardian newspaper on Tuesday quoted an unidentified official in Kandahar's local government as criticizing the first aid training, saying the Taliban did "not deserve to be treated like humans."

Cardon said the Red Cross also received angry e-mails from people around the world in response to the article. But he insisted that in Afghanistan most officials well understood and accepted the group's 151-year history of treating all war wounded regardless of their background or affiliation.

Cardon cited the Red Cross orthopedic hospital in Kabul where amputees are fitted with artificial limbs.

"We never ask the people who come about their background," he said. "This is the way we work everywhere in Afghanistan and all over the world."

As for training Taliban fighters and providing them with first aid kits, Cardon said journeys to Afghanistan's few functioning hospitals were often arduous or nearly impossible, meaning even basic first aid could help save lives when medical help isn't available.

He added that the three-day courses also were an opportunity to show participants the need to abide by the Geneva Conventions that govern the conduct of war.

The conventions also are the reason that U.S. military medical helicopters rescue insurgents as well as U.S. and NATO soldiers when they are called to battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan to pick up the wounded and rush them to field hospitals.

Red Cross first aid courses also have been held in Gaza with members of Hamas and other Palestinian groups, said Cardon.

Andrea Bianchi, a professor of international law at Geneva's Graduate Institute, said the Red Cross wasn't obliged to provide training and medical kits to the Taliban but appeared to have chosen to do so for practical reasons.

"Afghanistan is a very difficult place to operate," he said. "The idea that the ICRC might offer first aid kits doesn't shock me honestly."

"They stick to this idea that they are impartial and neutral, which means they must provide aid in whatever form is needed to improve the condition of the injured," said Bianchi. "Neutrality means you cannot take sides even in a situation in which it is clear who the bad guys are and who's on the right side."

Cardon, the Red Cross spokesman in Geneva, said the criticism recalled the period after Sept. 11, 2001, when the group was inundated with angry messages because it visited prisoners held at the U.S. detention center in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

If Afghan officials were to complain to the Red Cross about the first aid training for Taliban fighters "we will go and meet them to clarify that it's the way we have always worked and always will work," he said.

"We are quite confident that it (the report) will not affect our operations."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

GENEVA — The international Red Cross said Wednesday it would continue giving first aid training and kits to Taliban fighters in Afghanistan, despite drawing angry e-mails from around the world and cri...
GENEVA — The international Red Cross said Wednesday it would continue giving first aid training and kits to Taliban fighters in Afghanistan, despite drawing angry e-mails from around the world and cri...
Filed by Nicholas Sabloff  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 41
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
free thinker 3-5-7
11:10 PM on 05/26/2010
Hillary will now go to the UN and ask for sanctions on the Red Cross.
09:29 PM on 05/26/2010
Must admit, it's hard to blame them when neutrality is one of their core principles. Curious though, what do the Taliban think about getting aid from The Red Cross? Wouldn't they be happier with The Red Crescent org?
01:08 PM on 05/30/2010
It's the same organization at the international level, the International Committee of the Red Cross/Red Crescent. The national organizations might adopt one or the other symbols, but they are often more geared toward natural disasters. The ICRC is geared toward mitigating the harm caused by armed conflicts.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:24 PM on 05/26/2010
No good deed goes unpunished.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onwisconsin
Trust women; protect choice.
09:02 PM on 05/26/2010
The IRC does not choose sides in a conflict. Humans are humans on both sides and the IRC tries to alleviate suffering. Their mission is to save lives. I don't see where the conflict lies.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Julie Zhou
09:15 PM on 05/26/2010
Agreed. Just as simple and clear as that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cabinetmaniac
"Without a struggle, there can be no progress. "
07:16 AM on 05/27/2010
Well said.

:-]
blogisti
Approved Knowledge Only
06:30 PM on 05/26/2010
Imagine, the first group I ever heard of that practices Christian principles and they are not even a Christian Church or sect. The Christian churches won't notice or follow this lead because they are too obsessed with ideology to remember their Christian principles. Like the rest of the Christian churches they have probably re-written their principles to suit their ideologies.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
xena
06:29 PM on 05/26/2010
The International Red Cross is doing what they're supposed to do. Doctors treat gang members in the U.S. and I've yet to see anyone get their panties in a bunch over that. They try to save lives, not pick sides. If NGOs like the IRC start picking sides in conflict areas, we're all screwed.

Leave the picking sides part to the Christian missionaries. We accept they pick sides because their mission has nothing to do with saving lives, it's to preach and convert.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Julie Zhou
09:17 PM on 05/26/2010
To earn their wages to pay for their way to heaven by preaching and converting,
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:26 PM on 05/26/2010
I thought it was to implement servitude....or will that new Texas history book adjust my attitude on that topic?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lore Splitt
05:57 PM on 05/26/2010
We're talking first aid kits, that's it. Doctors are supposed to be neutral, it's not their place to pick sides. It's first aid, not complicated life saving techniques. No, they shouldn't pick sides, it's not their place to.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:29 PM on 05/26/2010
If doctors are supposed to be neutral, why can they choose not to provide women with birth control information, birth control procedures such as diaphragms and birth control pills, and legal abortions?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lore Splitt
09:52 PM on 05/26/2010
I agree with you 100%. It's along the same lines. If doctors are unwilling to provide patients with information of any and all options, then they are doing a disservice to those people. A doctor's personal beliefs has no place being used to limit, or to corerce a patient into taking a course of action they are not comfortable with.

In fact, many times refusing to give those women that kind of advice leads to more children than can be afforded, or women having children they really don't want, resenting them, and leading to abuses in some cases. In that case, the doctor is very much "doing harm", and considering the very first part of their oath is "do no harm", you're absolutely right.

Though, my statement wasn't in support of those doctors... what made you think I would back them up?
03:08 PM on 05/26/2010
Next thing you know, US is providing aid to Taliban.
03:05 PM on 05/26/2010
I mean you have to work with the future government, best to start early.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rollingrock
03:00 PM on 05/26/2010
I thought al qaeda was responsible for 9/11? Why are we fighting the god damn Taliban anyway?
03:07 PM on 05/26/2010
Because they invaded your country for some imaginary guy and some false flag attack. It's complicated.
06:48 PM on 06/05/2010
because they help nuture and were allied with al qaida. they also wouldn't hand over bin laden to the US.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
commonsense333
02:46 PM on 05/26/2010
I think it's digusting. Time to pick a side, Red Cross. The Red Cross KNOWS these are terrorists that they are training and helping, so they ought to be guilty of aiding and abetting a terrorist. It's war, meaning the bad guys die, and we save our own arses. This is just wrong on so many levels.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Julie Zhou
09:21 PM on 05/26/2010
It's a disgusting war and our soldiers die too.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
businesshugs
Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious
09:23 PM on 05/26/2010
the red cross is neutral, it is their job, and to call giving out first aid aiding and abetting is silly.
photo
MikeDu
Both salubrious and lugubrious concurrently.
02:44 PM on 05/26/2010
Someone recently watched that old WWII movie 'Stalag 17 'and were mighty disappointed in those Nazi prison camp guards. It was like they weren't even trying. Where were the black hoods and the shackles? Where was the corner of the compound dedicated to 'forceful interrogations'? Where was the scenae with field telephone electrical wires hooked to the genitals? Why all this talk of the Geneva Convention? Those Nazi guards certain didn't act like modern Ameriicans would.
09:28 PM on 05/26/2010
Nice. I'm glad a movie was so informative.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
free thinker 3-5-7
02:37 PM on 05/26/2010
It's a difference form treating them which I agree with (while they are in custody) than teaching them how to do it. Hey maybe that Taliban fighter that was wounded and given first aid by his buddy will get another chance at killing an American soldier tomorrow. Well done Red Cross.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thinkingwomanmillstone
My life is microbiodegradable.
02:26 PM on 05/26/2010
The Red Cross must remain free of political ties in order to do its mission. I applaud their fortitude in sticking to their stated policy.