Home page and navigation bar

L'accueil et la barre de navigation

La recepción y la barra de navegación

You are invited to take part in any of the discussion questions. To write a reply or change language, you must be registered (click on "Register" below) and then log in.

Vous êtes invité à participer aux forums ci-dessous. Avant d'écrire, vous devez vous enregistrer (cliquez ci-dessous) et ensuite inscrivez vous.

Usted está invitado a participar de los forums que se encuentran aquí debajo. Antes de escribir, debe registrarse (clickear abajo) y entonces conectar..

» Welcome Guest

» Log In :: Register :: Search :: Help

» Bienvenue Invité

» Inscrire :: Enregistrer :: Rechercher :: Aide

» Bienvenido Invitado

» Conectar :: Registro :: Búsqueda :: Ayuda


[ Track this question :: Email this question :: Print this question ]

Question: Can cluster bombs be abolished CPNN article: Over 100 Countries Negotiate Cluster Bomb Ban
CPNN Administrator
Posted: Dec. 31 1999,17:00

For more recent articles about the abolition of cluster munitions, click here

This discussion question applies to the following articles:

Over 100 Countries Negotiate Cluster Bomb Ban
L’Afrique s’unit contre les bombes à sous-munitions
Africa Unites Against Cluster Bombs
International Day of Mine Awareness and Mine Action
Lomé Conference Sets Course for Africa-wide Cluster Munition Ban
Thousands of Civilian Lives Being Saved by the Convention on Cluster Munitions
Japan Gets Rid of All Cluster Munitions
Celebrating our success in 2016; Supporting ICBL-CMC Efforts in 2017
Back to top
Profile PM 
CPNN Administrator
Posted: June 10 2008,08:11

Here are more recent news on the cluster bombs treaty, as taken from Agence France Presse (very little coverage in the US media, as usual for peace matters).


Observers laud landmark cluster bomb ban

May 28, 2008

DUBLIN (AFP). — Observers on Thursday lauded a landmark treaty agreed by delegates from 111 countries in Dublin to ban cluster bombs, though the deal lacks the backing of major producers and stockpilers.

After 10 days of painstaking negotiations at Croke Park stadium in Dublin, diplomats agreed the wording of a wide-ranging pact to outlaw the use, production, transfer and stockpiling of cluster munitions by its signatories.

It also provides for the welfare of victims and the clearing of areas contaminated by unexploded cluster bombs.

The agreement will be formally adopted on Friday, and signed in Oslo on December 2-3. Signatories would then need to ratify it.

It was hailed in The Independent newspaper in London as a "significant step forward", describing cluster bombs as "little more than air-delivered landmines" and declaring that "there can be no compromise when it comes to cluster bombs."

The newspaper acknowledged in its editorial, however, that the document was weakened by the absence of the United States, Russia, China, India, Israel and Pakistan from the Dublin talks, and thus the agreement.

Irish Foreign Minister Micheal Martin said the treaty was a "very strong and ambitious text which nevertheless was able to win consensus among all delegations."

"It is a real contribution to international humanitarian law," he added.

The Irish Department for Foreign Affairs said 111 participating states and 18 observer countries attended.

The treaty requires the destruction of stockpiled munitions within eight years -- though it leaves the door open for future, more precise generations of cluster munitions that pose less harm to civilians.

Britain was widely cited by campaigners as being at the forefront of a group of states seeking to water down the treaty.

But in a dramatic move Wednesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced in London that Britain would withdraw all its cluster bombs from service in a bid to "break the log jam" in the Dublin talks.

The draft treaty agreed in Dublin read:

"Each state party undertakes never under any circumstances to:

"(a) Use cluster munitions;

"(b) Develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer to anyone, directly or indirectly, cluster munitions;

"© Assist, encourage or induce anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a state party under this convention."

Much of the wrangling focused on what signatories could and could not do in joint operations with states still using cluster bombs.

The draft text said signatories "may engage in military cooperation and operations".

But the Cluster Munition Coalition, an umbrella group of non-governmental organisations, hopes that the treaty will stigmatise the use of cluster munitions -- as the similar Ottawa Treaty did for landmines -- and stop countries from helping others to use them.

CMC co-chair Simon Conway told AFP the treaty was a compromise but nonetheless "incredibly strong".

"We're going to end up with a strong treaty that prohibits every cluster bomb that's ever been used, with no transition periods, with strong obligations on clearance and particularly strong obligations on victim assistance," he said.

Hildegarde Vansintjan, advocacy officer for disability campaigners Handicap International, said the convention made states responsible for providing assistance to cluster bomb victims.

The treaty "would be a real step forward for the people suffering from cluster munitions all over the world," she told AFP.

The cluster munitions ban process, started by Norway in February 2007, took the same path as the 1997 Ottawa Treaty by going outside the United Nations to avoid vetoes and seal a swift pact.

Cluster munitions are among the weapons that pose the gravest dangers to civilians, especially in heavily bombed countries such as Laos, Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Dropped from planes or fired from artillery, they explode in mid-air, randomly scattering bomblets. Countries are seeking a ban due to the risk of civilians being killed or maimed by their indiscriminate, wide area effect.

They also pose a lasting threat to civilians as many bomblets fail to explode on impact.
Back to top
Profile PM 
-5 replies since May 21 2008,11:23 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this question :: Email this question :: Print this question ]