ICRC in conflict mediation

Eversince i've had my eyes opened about the world and the issues, political intrics that revolves among nations, and the idea of conflict resolution, i've always had this idealism of helping the world in making itselft a better place to live in for people.

I've talked a little about this organization, I've mentioned that in the aftermathof the Battle of Solverino in the 1860s, Henry Dunant resolved that the world needs an organization that can ensure protection of people and their rights in war.

ICRC is the oldest form of Red Cross in the world. Now it divides its work with IFRC --the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent societies-- where ICRC handles humanitarian operations in conflicting areas, and IFRC handles humanitarian operations in areas of disaster.

In International Humanitarian Law, there's an element of conflict among states that is called "protecting powers".  These are labels for states or international humanitarian organizations that are 3rd party to a conflict among states, meaning that their neutral pressence is merely to provide humanitarian assistance, that includes; setting up camps (safety zones, neutral zones), advocating dispute settlement, and ensuring/supervising that the values of humanity in war is pretected.

An interesting mechanism exists in choosing the "protecting powers" in a conflict. Basically each parties of the conflict compose 2 lists; one is 3-4 states that they want as their protecting powers, the other list is the states that they ban as the protecting powers of the nemesis state. ICRC helps out in this process, goin back and forth among the parties to ensure communication. I'm pretty sure there's a deadline for this process; a couple of weeks if i'm not mistaken.

This is definitely complicated, especially the fact that each party to the conflict has some kind of "veto" ability upon the choice of the oppsitions' protecting powers. If after all the negotiations and list making fails, ICRC will be taking part as the protecting power for both state in mediating the conflict.

This intrigues me. ICRC has 7 basic principles that it thrives to uphold; impartiality, neutrality, humanity, universality, independence, voluntary service, unity. In a world of conflicts with criss-crossing conflicts of interests, it is highly profounding to me how things work, how does ICRC stick to its 7 basic principles? How can an organization that upholds impartialy and neutrality from states when a large portion of its operating funds are fueled from money incoming from donating states?

It's my mission in life i guess to find out. That and exposing more of the actual happenings in a conflict zone through the world of war journalism (which i'll be writing about soon).