The German Red Cross: 20 Years of Neutral and Impartial Help in Afghanistan

zf. On 18 January, Zeit-Fragen visited the General Secretariat of the German Red Cross (GRC) in Berlin. The GRC with its 230 full-time employees is situated in the former Rietberg Clinic. In a committed and open manner Mr Roewer, GRC's press officer, introduced GRC's method of working and the whole scope of their work.

The GRC is worldwide the second largest National Red Cross Society with over 400,000 active volunteers. The guidelines of the impartial and neutral GRC clearly show that the aid provided to people is their main concern. The GRC cares for those in need, it is extremely important for blood donation supplies with its network of blood-donation centres, and it subdivides its tasks into a total of 126 areas of responsibility (see www.drk.de). At present GRC delegations are engaged in 43 international relief measures in various countries.

Only about 10 percent of GRC income is spent on administration. This is very little compared with other relief organizations. This means the money can be used very efficiently in places it is needed most.

The GRC has been working in Afghanistan since the invasion of the Russian troops twenty years ago. The present situation for the people living there is devastating. There are hardly any hospitals at all. With its co-ordinator for health affairs, Dr Richard Munz, the GRC is responsible for 48 clinics. Now that the media no longer carries out large-scale daily appeals for donations to Afghanistan, the situation has become catastrophic.

As part of the ICRC, the GRC attempts to provide neutral and impartial help according to the international humanitarian law of the Geneva Conventions, even though work is difficult, especially since Germany's armed forces, in alliance with NATO forces, are carrying out operations in Afghanistan.

In the Afghanistan conflict the United States of America and the United Nations have for the first time proceeded differently from the way armed conflicts are usually resolved. Normally, after a ceasefire, conflict parties sit together and discuss relief measures to help the population. Only then might discussions about the formation of a new government take place. In Afghanistan different, new ways of action were chosen. From the humanitarian point of view and from the point of view of the GRC this is the wrong way. First, a provisional government was formed and only then was it considered how the population could be helped.

Mr Roewer's explanations clearly show how important the GRC's commitment to national and international humanitarian affairs is and how important it is to support the work of the Red Cross.

Why is Afghanistan being dealt with in this way and what are the consequences? Since September 11 the world has experienced a change in the way the USA implements its plans. As already mentioned in Current Concerns, warehouses of the ICRC in Kabul with grain supplies were deliberately bombed by the USA twice (see Current Concerns no 11/12, 2001/2002). This was carried out to harm the population and to increase pressure on the Taliban. The USA would like to push organisations such as the Red Cross out of the areas of conflict because as neutral observers they are able to see what is happening behind the scenes and immediately recognise and register vio-lations of human rights.