Colombian military used Red Cross emblem in rescue

[Judi Lynn]

Source: CNN

updated 1 hour, 32 minutes ago
Colombian military used Red Cross emblem in rescue

By Karl Penhaul
CNN


BOGOTA, Colombia (CNN) -- Colombian military intelligence used the Red Cross emblem in a rescue operation in which leftist guerrillas were duped into handing over 15 hostages, according to unpublished photographs and video viewed by CNN.

Photographs of the Colombian military intelligence-led team that spearheaded the rescue, shown to CNN by a confidential military source, show one man wearing a bib with the Red Cross symbol. The military source said the three photos were taken moments before the mission took off to persuade the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia rebels to release the hostages to a supposed international aid group for transport to another rebel area.

Such a use of the Red Cross emblem could constitute a "war crime" under the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law and could endanger humanitarian workers in the future, according to international legal expert Mark Ellis, executive director of the International Bar Association.

"It is clear that the conventions are very strict regarding use of the symbol because of what it represents: impartiality, neutrality. The fear is that any misuse of the symbol would weaken that neutrality and would weaken the {Red Cross}," Ellis said.

"If you use the emblem in a deceitful way, generally the conventions say it would be a breach. {Based on the information as explained to me} the way that the images show the Red Cross emblem being used could be distinguished as a war crime, " he added.



Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/07/15/colombia.red.cross/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

[DCKit]

1. Colombian/U.S. Military/CIA Hijacked "Rescue" Flight n/t

[liberal N proud]

2. Legitimate fear

"The fear is that any misuse of the symbol would weaken that neutrality and would weaken the {Red Cross},"

[tekisui]

3. So chimpy paid the terrorist organization $20 million AND

the rescue mission flew a false flag.

amazing. Which ones are the good guys?

[Bacchus39]

6. I guess they should return the hostages to the FARC now

to make up for this "war crime".

[frylock]

7. miss the point much?

or how about the next time the real Red Cross rolls up they get massacred because of these idiots?!

[Bacchus39]

8. the FARC has used the same tactics, using ambulances with red cross emblems

as far as I am concerned the hostage rescue was a humanitarian mission. the rescue of the hostages is the important issue, not what the soldiers were wearing.

[WriteDown]

13. Haha, made be laugh...

I'm sure the hostages will be willing to return quietly to their captors until a better way can be come up to rescue them. Disguises have been used in war since the beginning of time. This is a non-issue.

[Bacchus39]

15. yes, no fair Colombian government!!!

you tricked us into giving up the people we kidnapped.

we want them back so we have the opportunity to kill them if you try to rescue them again.

[Judi Lynn]

16. Too bad no one has been around to rescue entire villages of people who were tortured

then slaughtered by the paramilitaries, some with the active participation of the Colombian miltary, as testified to by survivors, and by former paramilitaries.

That would have been a great time for god to send someone to rescue someone in desperate need.

Maybe you should spend a little more time learning why it is so many uninformed (hope that's their excuse) people support a government which is so heavily connected to its death squads and, together with the paramilitaries bears the distinction as noted by human rights groups of having murdered 75 to 80% of the dead Colombian citizens.

As noted even by the Washington Post recently, the Colombian military carries "kits" out in the field from which they retrieve various items like clothing and weapons to add the appearance of FARCs to the unarmed Colombians they slaughter.

Colombian Troops Kill Farmers, Pass Off Bodies as Rebels'

By Juan Forero
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, March 30, 2008; A12

~snip~
But under intense pressure from Colombian military commanders to register combat kills, the army has in recent years also increasingly been killing poor farmers and passing them off as rebels slain in combat, government officials and human rights groups say. The tactic has touched off a fierce debate in the Defense Ministry between tradition-bound generals who favor an aggressive campaign that centers on body counts and reformers who say the army needs to develop other yardsticks to measure battlefield success.

The killings, carried out by combat units under the orders of regional commanders, have always been a problem in the shadowy, 44-year-old conflict here -- one that pits the army against a peasant-based rebel movement.

~snip~
The trend has prompted concern among some members of the U.S. Congress. Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations foreign operations subcommittee, said he is holding up $23 million in military aid until he sees progress in the fight against impunity and state-sponsored violence.

"We've had six years, $5 billion in U.S. aid. More than half of it has gone to the Colombian military, and we find the army is killing more civilians, not less," Leahy said in an interview. "And by all accounts, all independent accounts, we find that civilians are just being taken out, executed and then dressed up in uniforms so they can claim body counts of guerrillas killed."

~snip~
Human rights groups see a disturbing trend, saying the tactics used by some army units are similar to those that death squads used to terrorize civilians. A top U.N. investigator said some army units went as far as to carry "kits," which included grenades and pistols that could be planted next to bodies.

"The method of killing people perceived as guerrilla collaborators is still seen as legitimate by too many members of the army," said Lisa Haugaard, director of Latin America Working Group, a Washington-based coalition of humanitarian groups.

More:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/29/AR2008032901118_pf.html

They do it, and so does the paramilitary. These death squad guys even have a name for it: "legalization." They misidentify citizens as FARC, as they turn them over to the government and they receive guns, ammunition, etc. as payment.

Edited.

[Bacchus39]

18. there you go again with your condescending attitude towards south americans

"Maybe you should spend a little more time learning why it is so many uninformed (hope that's their excuse) people support a government which is so heavily connected to its death squads and, together with the paramilitaries bears the distinction as noted by human rights groups of having murdered 75 to 80% of the dead Colombian citizens."


maybe it is YOU who should spend time learning why INFORMED people support the Uribe government, and stop denigrating Colombians as ignorant impoverished savages. You are the uninformed one.

[happyslug]

31. Or so you are OK with FARC IGNORING a Red Cross SYMBOL and bombing a Hospital?

Remember use of the RED CROSS for a cover of troop movement is a WAR CRIME. We hanged Nazis and Japanese for ignoring that rule (and the Japanese technically had NEVER ratified the Geneva Convention that made it a War Crime). The reason this rules exist is to permit Hospitals to continue to operate even as fighting is going on. In Vietnam even the Viet Cong observed Red Cross Symbols (Even while the US used the Helicopters with the Red Cross on them to haul in Ammunition while going in to haul out the wounded). They is even some reports of the Viet Cong calling in the Hospital Helicopters for the wounded (The Call was made in the Clear so the Viet Cong learned what it was, the accusation that the Viet Cong made the call occurred after one or two incidents where they was a lot of Viet Cong Wounded and no one could remember calling in the Chapters for the American Wounded).

Yes, disguises have been used forever, but certain symbols are NOT to be used by international law, and if used improperly the person using them are Guilty of a War Crime and if he or she shows up in ANY COUNTRY, that Country has the right to try that person if his or her own country does NOT do so.

The Red Cross symbol is counted on by everyone as a symbol of medical care. If you use it for anything else, it is possible that the other side will have to stop making that observation, leading to needless deaths. Do you want those dead men and women on your hands, for that is what you are advocating when you say it is OK to use the Red Cross Symbol as a disguise for military movement and operations.

[sudopod]

33. The point isn't that the hostages shouldn't have been rescued.

It's that the means was penny wise and pound foolish.

How many lives will this method cost in the future?

[Judi Lynn]

4. Colombia misused Red Cross emblem in hostage rescue

Colombia misused Red Cross emblem in hostage rescue
Reuters
Published: Wednesday, July 16, 2008

BOGOTA - Colombia misused the symbol of the Red Cross in this month's military rescue of politician Ingrid Betancourt and 14 other guerrilla-held hostages, the government said on Wednesday, admitting a possible violation of the rules of war.

"We regret that this occurred," President Alvaro Uribe said in a speech following reports that the Red Cross emblem was displayed on a vest or T-shirt worn by a Colombian intelligence officer who took part in the rescue mission.

Falsely portraying military personnel as Red Cross members is against the Geneva Conventions as it could put humanitarian workers at risk when they are in war zones.

More:
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=c786f768-4864-42b9-8e47-3d4a83e6b523

[Judi Lynn]

5. Uribe: Betancourt rescuers used Red Cross

updated 14 minutes ago
Uribe: Betancourt rescuers used Red Cross

By Karl Penhaul
CNN


BOGOTA, Colombia (CNN) -- Colombian President Alvaro Uribe says one Red Cross symbol was used in a daring and successful hostage rescue mission that took place two weeks ago.

One of the rescuers was wearing the symbol on a bib, Uribe said Wednesday in a nationally televised announcement that was also carried on radio. He described the wearing of the symbol as a slip-up.

Such a use of the Red Cross emblem could constitute a "war crime" under the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law and could endanger humanitarian workers in the future, according to international legal expert Mark Ellis, executive director of the International Bar Association.

Uribe said he was sorry for the mistake and had talked to Red Cross officials about it.

He said the member wearing the bib had been nervous, and feared for his life.

~snip~
"If you use the emblem in a deceitful way, generally the conventions say it would be a breach. the way that the images show the Red Cross emblem being used could be distinguished as a war crime, " Ellis added.

More:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/07/16/colombia.cross/index.html

[gratuitous]

9. Dear warmongers

Pacifists have it tough enough as it is. We go into situations facing people armed to the teeth, angry and skittish. Please don't appropriate our forms, customs and rituals for your own purposes. We don't go into situations with guns blazing, please have the slightest decency and courtesy. Since you're truly persuaded of the righteous power of violence to redeem any and every situation, please stick to your guns, literally speaking.

Thanks very much from the unarmed people who will now face the increased possibility of being massacred thanks to your stupidity, you fucking blood-thirsty douchebags. May you spend eternity wiping diarrhetic flies' asses.

[Bacchus39]

10. rescuing hostages is warmongering???

sorry, I can't join you in the blame for wearing a red cross bib versus the overall achievement of the hostage rescue.

[gratuitous]

11. So the ends justify the means

Well played. And the next time some Red Cross worker gets blown to Kingdom Come because some paranoid rebel isn't convinced of his authenticity, you can serenely sit back and purr to yourself that we're the good guys, and not savages. Rum go for the guy in the bib.

Thanks a heap.

[Judi Lynn]

12. Any rebels would have a natural reason to fear Colombian military who have been connected to the

death squads for ages. They are on record through testimonies both by survivors and by ex-paramilitaries who participated personally in tortures and massacres of simple townspeople, small villagers, people in peace communities which are publicly known to be totally neutral who have sworn that Colombian soldiers themselves took part in massacres, and kept the townspeople from being able to escape.

Since they know these same folks have wormed their way into their midst now, disguised as humanitarians, they're going to be far less trusting.

The heavy US-supported military presence has worked with the paramilitary narcotraffickers in keeping the entire country living in fear, with so many of their journalists already fled long ago, and the remaining ones "self-censoring" to avoid being assassinated. There is no opposition allowed in that country. Their "popular" President calls out anyone who dares to question any of them, and they start getting death threats within moments.

He's popular as hell with the people are scared spitless of what his mad dog paramilitaries will do to them if they attract their attention for any reason.

It's one things for some DU buttinskis to snicker, and give us all that right-wing posturing no one sane can stand, implying as long as you've got the firepower you're entitled to make up your own rules for others to live by, but they are smelly, can be spotted from miles away as corrupted, failed human beings who really have nothing to add to any serious conversation.

I believe if they're going to wear a bogus bib in the future, they could do everyone a favor by not aping decent human beings by wearing their symbols.

Wear these, instead, jackasses.

[Bacchus39]

14. the rebels have no respect for the red cross, they have blatantly used the same tactics

and I will blame those who blow the red cross workers away and not some peon who wore a red cross bib.

its done and over with. there is nothing that can be done. they can discipline the soldier who wore the bib. what else to do?


and yes, certainly in this instance the end justified the means. the release of 15 people held in bondage versus some guy wearing a red cross emblem.

the rebels were going to deliver, unwittingly, the hostages anyway.

[Judi Lynn]

17. No, they were going to deliver these same hostages much earlier,

when Reyes was their contact person with the French government and had made arrangements with them to hand them over, and was involved in negotiations when Uribe invaded Ecuador and murdered him and all those other people.

[Bacchus39]

19. ummm.... so why didn't they???

they could have at any time. there was no agreement with regards to Betancourt and the Americans.

and I repeat and rerepeat they could have let them go at any time.

[WriteDown]

21. I believe in several past hostage situations...

special operatives have posed as members or the press or cameramen. Maybe they should also turn those hostages back over. When Red Cross workers are killed and the killers specifically blame this hostage transfer, then we can talk. Otherwise, this is just rampant speculation.

[frylock]

24. so why didn't they???

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3397586#3398452

[Pavulon]

22. Murder is a technical term resolved for real people

you kill, or seize interrogate, and then kill hostage takers. They had it coming. This happened with cia support and certainly with an M4 you payed for. The rest of the people there are fair targets for military operations.

The FARC got played in an international game.

They want to play war, they can deal with that choice. That choice means you can get shot or blown up.

Unless you are cleared by the US or some other IC you have no first hand knowledge of what Reyes was doing. So you are either connected or bullshitting.

[Judi Lynn]

23. Thanks for clearing that up. Apparently these guys are wrong.

COLOMBIA: French Negotiators Were to Meet Reyes the Day He Was Killed
By Kintto Lucas

QUITO, Mar 7 (IPS) - Three personal envoys of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who were in Ecuador since October 2007, were phoned Saturday Mar. 1 by Colombian Peace Commissioner Luis Carlos Restrepo, who warned them not to go to a meeting with guerrilla leader Raúl Reyes because they would be in danger.

Sarkozy’s envoys in Ecuador, who were there with the consent of Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, were negotiating with Reyes the release of former Colombian presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt, who has been held hostage by the guerrillas for six years, said a French diplomatic source who wished not to be named.

The source told IPS that the three French negotiators were in a town near the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) camp that was bombed by the Colombian military in the wee hours of Saturday morning. The raid, carried out three kilometres from the Colombian border, killed Reyes -- the rebel group’s international spokesman -- and around two dozen other insurgents.

The envoys were on their way to a meeting that morning with Reyes, who was actually already dead, when they received Restrepo’s phone call warning them not to approach the contact point, for their own safety.

When Colombia announced that Reyes had been killed, the French government expressed its displeasure. Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner told the press that "It’s bad news that the man we were talking to is dead."

The rebel leader was France’s contact in the negotiations for the release of Betancourt, a French-Colombian citizen, which Sarkozy has made a top priority of his government.

More:
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41513

[Pavulon]

27. Worked out well for everyone. POS dead

negotiations not needed. The Fat Man in the Red shirt has been really quiet. I wonder if that laptop had any details??

Source not named BTW. Wonder of France helped open a window into his mind?

[gratuitous]

20. Thanks for the explanation

For future reference, could you please run a prospective list of war crimes that are acceptable to commit, pending the outcome? For example, in order to save a village, is it okay to destroy it? In order to get a really, really bad guy, is it okay to kill 10 unarmed non-combatants? 20? If half a dozen non-combatants are killed, but the really, really bad guy gets away, are the good guys (us, of course), allowed the full complement of non-combatant deaths on our next attempt or are those non-combatant deaths subtracted from the acceptable collateral damage? How much torture of a prisoner is okay if we really, really think he might have some good information? And is it sufficient to say that we thought he had really, really good information, or does the prisoner actually have to have some really, really good information?

That's for starters. As I contemplate even more heinous war crimes, I'll try to come up with a justification for them so that we can continue to believe that we're the good guys non-pareil.

[frylock]

25. you have some real idiots around here anymore..

expect some red herrings and non sequiturs in reply to your post.

[Robb]

26. No shit. What the hell is wrong with people?

You cannot, cannot, cannot, cannot, CANNOT pick and choose which articles of the Geneva Convention you want to abide by. We have seen the results already.

[Bacchus39]

28. sure, if you don't mind me using reason and judgement

and I would appeal to yours as well and simply say, wearing a red cross shirt versus bombing a village. do you find those "crimes" comparable?

do you believe the punishment for committing those two different crimes should be equal? why or why not? My suggestion for punishment of the soldier who committed this "war crime" would be 100 push-ups. does that suffice or do you believe that execution or life in prison would be just for either of those indiscretions?

yes, the "rules of war" are so reasonable and rational that they are unassailable. its fine to kill and maim on the battlefield, with a bomb, or artillery shell but hands off if you capture the enemy. yes, makes all the sense in world.

[Robb]

29. You've rather walked off and left the point behind

As soon as it becomes apparent that people who dress as relief workers could be soldiers, no relief worker is safe. Think what you want, but those NGOs work in terrible places doing wonderful things, tolerated by complete bastards because of what they do: help innocents, and stay out of the conflict.

It's not that there are "rules of war," but rather that even those without much of a moral compass can be persuaded to leave relief workers to do their thing -- especially since it is often necessary, and the ruling warmakers can't afford to do it.

Actions that put those incredible people in further danger than they're already in are reprehensible. Set up whatever straw man you care to, but yes, those responsible should be punished by whatever lawful means are available.

[Bacchus39]

30. I don't know what to tell you

surely a reasonable person doesn't equate bombing of a village with wearing a red cross emblem. there is no way you could have equivalent punishments for these actions. you do know that a "humanitarian" contingent was part of the hostage rescue scheme don't you??? sometimes extraordinary measures are needed. and I would certainly argue the mission itself was humanitarian.
the result, without a drop of blood being spilled and freedom of 15 hostages, its hard to criticize. yes, considering the end and the means, certainly justified.

[Robb]

32. Well, for 15 hostages

...They've (a) made it clear NGOs can be targeted in this conflict, because who knows? and (b) suggested that they're fair game in other conflicts.

I understand the result is difficult to criticize. But I'm still concerned for the long game, and it may wind up being far worse than bombing a village, over time.

[Bacchus39]

35. yes, but it wouldn't be the first time either that relief workers were targeted

the "rules" of war these days aren't being followed much. and I would still blame the perpetrators of any attacks on relief workers rather than say the soldier who wore the red cross shirt.

[sudopod]

34. The ends justify the means?

Where have we heard THAT before?

[Bacchus39]

36. if you look at this case, yes

that cliché doesn't always signify a negative.

its done, I don't know what you can do. no-one was killed, the hostages are free, its done.

[sudopod]

37. Short term vs Long term

no one has died because of it YET.

[Jack_DeLeon]

38. I dont see the problem...

It was a rescue mission, no one was harmed, no shots were fired.

[slackmaster]

39. Even worse, some of the treacherous bastards wore Che Guevara T-shirts!

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jOmIN5plrquPEEKguF_mFj6t8kXwD91V6H5G0