I am not an expert on land mines or in protecting military installations and bases, but it seems odd to me that we would stop production of anti-personnel mines in 1997, eschew their use since 1991, and yet refuse to sign the treaty that bans them. I understand that all the other major military powers are also refusing to sign, even though the treaty has been endorsed by 156 countries. So, I’m not making some sweeping condemnatory judgment about this decision. But if we’re not producing them and we’re not using them, then why take the public relations hit by not signing the treaty?
I guess I’m missing something.
God forbid we should look like some kind of peacenik, socialistic nation rather than the gladiatorial collosus we want the world to fear and obey.
I see that now on CNN “the left” has become antiwar instead of pro-healthcare. The show goes on.
CNN has gone to shit ever since Ted Turner sold it to Time-Warner
I think this is because of our artillery, bombs, missiles, that turn into cluster munitions. The residual “bomb-lets” that are “duds” are famous for taking limbs off children who find them long after there use.
are cluster bomblets covered under the treaty?
are cluster bomblets covered under the treaty?
Nope. See separate comment.
There are two treaties to keep track of:
1. Mine Ban Treaty
Covers anti-personnel mines only, not “anti-tank” mines. There are 156 nations that are party to this treaty, 39 that are not. Established in Ottawa in 1997.
The Mine Ban Treaty is the international agreement that bans antipersonnel landmines. Sometimes referred to as the Ottawa Convention, it is officially titled: the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction.
The treaty is the most comprehensive international instrument for ridding the world of the scourge of mines. When they join the Mine Ban Treaty, states commit to:
never use antipersonnel mines, nor to “develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer” them;
destroy mines in their stockpiles within four years of the treaty becoming binding;
clear mines in their territory, or support efforts to clear mines in mined countries, within 10 years;
in mine-affected countries, conduct mine risk education and ensure that mine survivors, their families and communities receive comprehensive assistance;
offer assistance to other States Parties, for example in providing for survivors or contributing to clearance programmes;
adopt national implementation measures (such as national legislation) in order to ensure that the terms of the treaty are upheld in their territory.
Eighty percent of the world’s states are party to the treaty.
2. Convention on Cluster Munitions
A result of the so-called Oslo process, concluded in 2008. There are currently 103 countries that are party to ther convention, 92 that are not.
The Convention on Cluster Munitions is the international agreement that bans cluster munitions. When they join the Convention on Cluster Munitions, states commit to:
never use cluster munitions, nor to “develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer” them;
destroy cluster munitions in their stockpiles within eight years of the convention becoming binding;
clear and destroy cluster munitions remnants in their territory, or support efforts to clear cluster munitions remnants in affected countries, within 10 years;
in affected countries, ensure that survivors, their families and communities receive comprehensive assistance;
offer financial or technical assistance to other States Parties, for example in providing assistance to survivors or contributing to clearance programmes;
adopt national implementation measures (such as national legislation) in order to ensure that the terms of the convention are upheld in their territory;
reporting regularly on all of these activities.
Treaty Basics
Convention Basics
From the definitions in the Mine Ban Treaty that you linked, I think it leaves it open to interpretation if one of our unexploded artillery, missile or other device (currently being used in Iraq and Afghanistan) would be considered an anti-personnel device. No pun intended but what a clusterf### this whole thing is. Why don’t they just narrow the definition to exclude our current arsenal of crap we use so that at least we support the ban on what it was originally intended to ban?
Article 2
Definitions
UXO (Un-exploded Ordnance) is an entirely different story. It is simply unrealistic to expect any acceptance to ban artillery shells, grenades or ‘improvised devices’. The treaty was narrowed down to anti-personnel mines only as a compromise to have as many signatories as possible – the bigger ‘anti-tank’ mines (which conceivably may be triggered by persons anyway) were excluded.
Yours truly took these images in a recent battle area in southern Sudan a few years ago:
UXO:
Then we – unexpectedly – found a trip-wire AP mine and bid a hasty retreat:
Dry surroundings
ask,
Thank you for the information and for posting those photos from Sudan. However, now I’m back to not understanding why the US doesn’t sign it.(?)
Well – why the US doesn’t sign it.(?) – beats me as well.
The list of non-signatories include many of the usual suspects when it comes to armed conflict and I guess they will not give up any of their means to destroy and maim the ‘enemy’.
eschew their use since 1991,
It is possible that no additional land mines have been deployed/placed since 1991, but afaik, the Korea DMZ is still full of them – on both sides.
That is true. The article says we having “used” them since 1991, which I take to mean that we haven’t utilized them in any conflict since the Persian Gulf War.
Jobs, jobs jobs. All of 17,000 of them at ATK. Or is it Money, money, money.
Boycott, divest, sanction.
We might need them someday is the position.
Here’s my reading of this. It takes a 2/3 majority in the Senate to approve a treaty.
Count the noses. How many votes to you see for “giving up American sovereignty” when it comes to land mines?
Thought so.
So why bother, with so much else on the plate?
I’m really more interested in seeing the existing land mines and anti-personnel cluster weapons cleaned up quickly from the places where they have already been deployed.
And then wait until some sanity returns to Congress. I’m hoping that wait is not long.