Land Mines Are Latest Attempt by Obama to Distance Himself From Peace Prize

[unhappycamper]

Land Mines Are Latest Attempt by Obama to Distance Himself From Peace Prize
by Russ Wellen | December 6, 2009 - 12:53pm

THE DEPROLIFERATOR -- This year the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to President Obama on spec, if you will. In other words, it was a show of faith that he'd not only follow through on his nuclear disarmament plans, but launch other peace initiatives.

Of course, despite the monetary award, the prize doesn't contractually bind the recipient to a specified course of action. Still, one can't help but wonder how the president's decision to inject a fresh infusion of troops into Afghanistan, a country already on life support, can be reconciled with his status as a Peace Prize winner. (Yes, I know about Henry Kissinger and Yasser Arafat.)

Meanwhile, the president is adding insult to injury with an issue that, even on a good week -- never mind one that's dominated by the Afghanistan decision -- flies under the radar. The Second Review Conference of the 10-year-old Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines -- pause for breath here -- and on Their Destruction has just wound down.

For its part, the United States hasn't used antipersonnel mines since the 1991 Gulf War, nor has it produced them since 1997. So far, so good. But that's where the good news about the United States and land mines ends. First, the United States still possesses 10 million land mines. Second, along with Russia, China, and India, it's one of the few states that hasn't signed the treaty. As if that weren't bad enough, five days before the conference, Reuters reported that State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said:

This administration undertook a policy review and we decided that our land mine policy remains in effect. … We determined that we would not be able to meet our national defense needs nor our security commitments to our friends and allies if we signed this convention . … But we will be as an observer, obviously, because we haven't signed the convention, nor do we plan to sign the convention.

Rest of article at: http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/25341

[stray cat]

1. Maybe he doesn't want to bury soldiers instead of land mines

[Robb]

2. I'll give you points for catchiness, at least. nt

[babylonsister]

3. Still under review afaik...

Review of Land Mine Treaty ‘to Take Some Time,’ State Dept. Says

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/26/world/americas/26mines.html

[msongs]

4. hey, it's in the bible - thou shalt kill with landmines nt

[ensho]

5. agree with you and say no to landmines

we have developed enough ways to kill people. we can do without landmines.

[Renew Deal]

6. Do mines eve lose their explosive power?

If not, these things could be around forever. If so, we may start producing mines again some day.

[TexasObserver]

7. Recommend