Some days ago, a number of us were (rightly) miffed at hearing that the government would not sign the landmine treaty (along with China, the Koreas, and several other nations who spurned the treaty). Now it seems that whoever said we would not sign the treaty kinda jumped the gun (or that's at least what it looks like to me). The treaty is still under consideration.
Read about this development below the fold.
From voanews.com (with info from the AP and Reuters):
A State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said Tuesday the United States would not be able to meet its national defense needs if it signed the global treaty.
But in a statement Wednesday, Kelly said the Obama administration is still looking at its overall policy and while the review continues the current policy will stay in place.
What can I say, when one lives on the cruel 24-hour news cycle, one tends to over-react to news that hasn't fully developed (at least that's my interpretation). I for one am glad the decision is not made yet. While it doesn't necessarily mean the treaty will be signed, it means that at least they're considering it. Landmines have killed and maimed many innocents in civil wars across the world, per this passage:
The International Campaign to Ban Landmines says the devices are known to have caused nearly 5,200 casualties last year.
More on what the State Department plans to do in considering this treaty:
Kelly said Washington still plans to send an inter-agency delegation of humanitarian mine experts to Cartagena, Colombia next week to observe a review conference on the decade-old Mine Ban Treaty.
A little history on the US and the landmine treaty:
The administration of former President Bill Clinton refused to sign the treaty but set a target of 2006 for renouncing the use of landmines.
In 2004, former President George W. Bush's administration revised the U.S. policy and said it would ban mines without self-destruct features after 2010. But, it said it would impose no limits on so-called "smart" mines which have timing devices to automatically de-fuse explosives within hours or days.
Well, I personally am glad that the administration is going to be researching the treaty and consider whether or not to sign it. However, one still ought to contact the White House and press them to sign this treaty. There's no reason for us to have this barbaric weapon.
It's always nice to get good news, it makes you feel contented.
P.S. Calchala posted a comment below on why the administration and administrations past have not been wont to sign the treaty:
I know why it's hard for them (1+ / 0-)
The US has stopped using landmines. There haven't been ANY reported usage on landmines by the US since the First Gulf War. Even Pres. Bush stopped using them. The problem is that we have a MASSIVE stockpile, and that's the second part of the treaty that needs to be resolved. It's difficult to dismantle that stockpile to comply with the second part of the treaty.
Happy Thanksgiving, one and all, have a great day!