“It was heartening to see so many governments determined to create a cluster munitions treaty that will make a real difference in saving civilian lives and limbs,” said Steve Goose, director of the Arms Division of Human Rights Watch. “All proposals to weaken the draft treaty – most notably by Denmark, France, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom – were rejected.”
However, it is expected that the proposals will be re-considered at the Dublin negotiations and Human Rights Watch urged participants to hold fast to the Wellington text and ensure the creation of an effective treaty.
Cluster munitions are large weapons that release dozens or hundreds of smaller submunitions. Air-dropped or ground-launched, they cause two major humanitarian problems. First, their wide-area effect virtually guarantees civilian casualties when they are used in populated areas. Second, many of the submunitions do not explode on impact as designed but lie around like landmines, causing civilian casualties for months or years to come.
...
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/02/22/global18135.htm
Note: http://hrw.org/english/...
82 Countries Endorse Strong Ban On Cluster Munitions
Posted on Saturday, February 23 at 13:31 by N SayContributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
Page 1
The most objectionable proposals for exceptions were put forward by France, Germany, Japan, and Switzerland; for a transition period by Germany and Japan (with notable support from the United Kingdom); and for interoperability by Canada, Germany, and Japan (with notable support from Australia). Other states vocal in their support of provisions to weaken the treaty included the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Spain, and Sweden.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.mediaforfreedom.com/ReadArticle.asp?ArticleID=9691">http://www.mediaforfreedom.com/ReadArticle.asp?ArticleID=9691</a><br />
<br />
I simply cannot understand why ANY country would not do everthing they could to eliminate this weapon, but then I do not understand many things about "war"! I could not find any referance other that the above to Canada, did they sign or not, does anyone know?<br />
As I understand Canadas objection, they may support a ban but would have our troops "help" other nations who did not, use them! What a crock!<br />
<p>---<br>When you are up to your ass in alligators it is difficult to remember that the initial objective was to drain the swamp