Exclusive: Secretary of State Kerry to sign Arms Trade Treaty - diplomats

[ProSense]

Exclusive: Secretary of State Kerry to sign Arms Trade Treaty - diplomats

By Paul Eckert, Louis Charbonneau and Arshad Mohammed

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, in a move that puts the Obama administration at odds with the powerful American gun lobby, will sign the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty regulating the $70 billion international conventional arms business, diplomats said on Tuesday.

A senior State Department official said President Barack Obama's administration would notify the U.S. Senate on Tuesday and Kerry would sign the treaty on Wednesday on the sidelines of the annual U.N. General Assembly in New York.

<...>

The arms treaty, which requires ratification by the Senate and has been attacked by America's pro-gun National Rifle Association, would help Western countries press to curtail Russian arms sales to Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad's government has been accused of widespread abuses in more than two years of civil war.

Amnesty International Secretary General Salil Shetty called Kerry's decision "a milestone towards ending the flow of conventional arms that fuel atrocities and abuse."

- more -

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/24/us-un-assembly-kerry-treaty-idUSBRE98N0RG20130924

[karynnj]

1. It is hard to believe that the right fights this treaty

It would be great to stop the flow of guns.

[dkf]

2. Does that stop our funding of guns to Syrian rebels?

Or our funding of Israeli weapons?

Funny how they only mention Russia when we are the hugest perpetrator I bet.

[ProSense]

3. It's a UN treaty

"Does that stop our funding of guns to Syrian rebels? Or our funding of Israeli weapons? Funny how they only mention Russia when we are the hugest perpetrator I bet."

Did you read the article, or is the concern that Russia is being persecuted?

The United States and 86 other signatory nations "must implement the treaty and bring to an end the supply of weapons to countries where they would be used to commit or facilitate genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes or other serious human rights violations," Shetty said in a statement.

<...>

Frank Januzzi, deputy executive director of Amnesty International USA, called the move "a very significant win for 20 years of human rights activism" by his organization and by Oxfam International, a confederation of groups focused on poverty and injustice.

Januzzi said the treaty could be applied to the conflict in Syria, making arm sales to the government illegal under international law. Russia, Syria's main arms supplier, and China abstained in the April U.N. vote and have not signed the pact.

[Egalitarian Thug]

4. Says the largest arms dealer in the world.

This would be funny if it weren't so completely evil.

[ProSense]

6. It's "completely evil" for them to want to regulate it? n/t

[Egalitarian Thug]

11. That's not what the proposed treaty says, but that apparently escaped you.

From the article:

President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria, whose country has been repeatedly attacked by a cross-border Islamic jihadist militant group called Boko Haram, told the United Nations such rebellions are "sustained by unfettered access by non-state actors to illicit smart arms and light weapons."

"The treaty recognizes and protects the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess and use arms for legitimate purposes," said the official.

The U.S. is the world's largest arm exporter by several times the world's second largest arms exporter, China. We supply almost a third of all "legitimate" arms sales across the globe. As long as we are pouring the gasoline, the fire will not go out.

The article points out that the weapons are brought in by "non-state actors" and no treaty is going to stop, or even slow that. This is a sop, a diplomatic fig leaf so that we can say we're doing something about a problem we exacerbate every single day.

[ProSense]

12. What? Where does that say it doesn't regulate sales?

"The article points out that the weapons are brought in by 'non-state actors' and no treaty is going to stop, or even slow that. This is a sop, a diplomatic fig leaf so that we can say we're doing something about a problem we exacerbate every single day. "

What the hell does that have to do with the treaty? That's like claiming gun control isn't going to stop illegal guns.

Sounds like you're arguing the NRA position.

[libdem4life]

5. Good. Starting to sound and act like a Democratic Administration. May the Slippery Slope begin. n/t

[Revanchist]

7. Wait, I'm confused....

Can he sign the treaty without it first being ratified by the Senate? Will the treaty be legal and binding without said ratification?

[Hardlyaround]

8. Yes, it's signed first and then ratified in the Senate.

It won't be legal and binding until ratification.

[Revanchist]

9. Thanks, I thought it was the other way around

and the Senate had to approve and ratify a treaty before it was able to be signed.

[Jesus Malverde]

10. We are fueling the conflict in syria sending TONS of small arms and ammunition.

It's about time we cut off the flow of these weapons of mass murder....

[pampango]

14. I believe that under this treaty weapons suppliers to all sides would be liable since all sides have

committed human rights abuses using the arms provided by foreign countries.

The treaty does not distinguish between states and non-state actors that use weapons to abuse people.

[BlueToTheBone]

13. Yeah! Another step on the way to world wide peace. n/t

[Scurrilous]

15. K & R

[NuclearDem]

16. Good.

Maybe it'll help stop the sale of cluster bombs to the Saudis, crowd control weapons to the Egyptians, and small arms to the Syrian rebels.