Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

alp227

(32,034 posts)
Sun Jul 1, 2012, 11:13 PM Jul 2012

UK presses US on human rights clause in arms trade treaty

Source: The Guardian

British and European foreign ministers are preparing to defy Washington at talks over an arms trade treaty, amid fears the US will use its diplomatic clout to water down proposals for the first comprehensive laws governing weapons sales.

More than 150 countries have sent delegations to the UN for the special month-long session that begins on Monday, with many hoping that 15 years after the idea of an arms trade treaty was first mooted by Nobel peace prize winners, and seven years after the UK took an unexpected lead on the issue, the UN is now close to an agreement that could transform the $1tn arms industry.

A draft of the treaty, agreed this year, states that governments must not approve arms sales to countries where there is a "substantial risk of a serious violation" of human rights. If the draft treaty was in place now, it would prevent Russia from sending arms to Syria.

But the US wants the wording of this key component of the draft treaty changed to say governments need only "consider" factors such as human rights records before authorising weapon sales.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/02/human-rights-arms-trade-treaty

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
UK presses US on human rights clause in arms trade treaty (Original Post) alp227 Jul 2012 OP
Not Surprised pmorlan1 Jul 2012 #1
K&R Solly Mack Jul 2012 #2

Solly Mack

(90,773 posts)
2. K&R
Mon Jul 2, 2012, 03:29 AM
Jul 2012

What's the point in saying you are "considering" human rights violations when you're going to do it anyway?

Does it actually fool anyone? Is anyone truly going to be taken in by the wording?

Sure, we considered it - but felt it was still best to sell'em some guns.

So...the consideration is what? The high ground on paper if not in practice? A display of regard toward human rights? lmao

Oh, well.



Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»UK presses US on human ri...