Monday, April 21, 2014


News

UN Arms Trade Treaty Negotiations Fail

Activists erected a mock graveyard across from the United Nations to highlight the need for an arms treaty.
Activists erected a mock graveyard across from the United Nations to highlight the need for an arms treaty.
TEXT SIZE - +
By Courtney Brooks
Month-long UN negotiations to establish the first international treaty to regulate the multibillion-dollar global arms trade have ended without a deal.
 
"I will avoid saying more to avoid being diplomatically incorrect. I merely assume full responsibility and I apologize for not having the diplomatic skill to have led you to a better finale," said Ambassador Roberto Garcia Moritan, the chairman of the talks, when announcing the failure to make a deal on July 27.
 
A statement signed by 90 countries, including some in the European Union and many African nations, was circulated as Moritan made the announcement on July 27.
 
The statement said the countries were "disappointed" but "not discouraged" by the collapse of negotiations, and called for the text to be taken to the General Assembly (GA) for adoption.
 
The treaty, which would be the first-ever binding agreement regulating the $60 billion global arms trade, would only need to be approved by a two-thirds majority to be adopted by the GA, rather than a unanimous consensus as these negotiations demanded.
 
Many delegations spoke after Moritan's announcement, commending his work and calling for the treaty to be brought to the GA for a vote. Some, including India and Russia, reiterated that while the draft was a strong base for negotiations they needed more time to consider it.
 
Surprise At Breakdown

The fizzle came as somewhat of a surprise to NGOs and delegations alike. The draft treaty, which was circulated on July 27, was met with positive responses from NGOs and participants in the conference.
 
While the Arms Control Secretariat, Amnesty International, Oxfam, and the Arms Control Association called for some loopholes to be closed, they expressed hope that a strong treaty could be passed by the deadline.
 
An NGO spokesperson speaking on condition of anonymity expressed shock at the result and told RFE/RL that the mood at the conference a day before the negotiations failed had been "enthusiastic."
 
One of the sticking points of the negotiations was whether the treaty would regulate ammunition -- the United States remained strongly opposed to the provision, although the country regulates ammunition itself.
 
NGOs continually called for U.S. President Barack Obama's administration to take a "leadership" role and allow ammunition into the treaty.
 
Anna MacDonald, head of arms control at Oxfam, said the talks breakdown was a "missed opportunity."
 
"World governments had the chance today to agree -- a historic agreement to bring the arms trade under control, and a small minority of governments unfortunately prevented that from happening," MacDonald said.
 
"But we're not over yet. It's clear that the vast majority of counties do want to see this treaty happen. Ninety of them made a very strong statement saying they're determined to make it a reality later this year in the General Assembly."
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: Robert J from: Detroit, MI (USA)
July 28, 2012 08:30
I agree that we should ban guns as that means there will be no more gun crimes.
We have banned cocaine and there is no more cocaine in this country. Including meth, marijuana......
Drinking and driving is outlawed. I am glad I don't see on the news of drunk driving murders anymore.
This Colorado maniac purchased 10 gallons of gasoline to be part of his bomb that was setup as a trap. That excess amount of gas should have been regulated. Who needs more than a gallon of gasoline from the pump!!! We need to ban such high amount of gasoline purchases right away.
We tell the people that guns are banned and I know those hardened criminals will understand and comply and register their weapons the same day the announcement is made. And we should proudly put signs on our windows and front lawn indicating that we are anti-gun and you may not bring guns into our homes as we don't allow them here. The Cinemark theater where this attack happened had those signs and policies clearly posted. This one criminal must have been illiterate to have missed it. I know all criminals after seeing those signs would have known to leave their guns at home.
Sure federal buildings are well protected. But places like schools, churches and many other places where laws clearly state that guns are not allowed have never been targets of mass murders. If I was crazy and knew of places where guns are banned, that is the last place I would target knowing that my gun would cease to function as soon as I get there and wait for the police to come by after a few minutes.
Listen to people like Mayor Bloomberg. We should all become public officials and receive around the clock protection and have enough money to hire our own protection while taking guns out of only the law abiding citizens. His home address is proudly listed and people know that there are no guns there because he is against all guns.
When these public officials call for protection, the police are there 24/7. When they call 911, additional units are routed for high profile targets. I have not called myself or needed the protection, but I am sure if I called the police right now and request 24/7 protection, they will surely grant it to me as a simple taxpaying citizen. So I agree that these are the best people to lead for ban on guns from law-abiding citizens and ban ONLY for the law-abiding citizens.
Look to the rest of the world like peaceful UK with very strict gun laws. Your family is sitting peacefully at home and some thug comes in to rob you with a big knife. They know you don't have a gun. What is there to worry about?
Take the high cap magazines away. I know those in organized crimes are too poor and too stupid to acquire the materials and knowledge to build them. I know no criminals can get a hold of them. Of course, with my years of machine shop work, I as a simple man can build those myself, but if these laws are enacted, I promise to get them erased from my memory.
Let's assume that everyone in that theater were former SEAL members and ordinary citizens now. All armed and well trained in perfect physical health. What would have been the reduction in casualty?
Don't just eat the propaganda. Just think for a moment and do a real research. The answer is not more gun laws if we really want to fix the problems.
There will always be evil out there. And when you cannot stand up against it, we will fall as victims of their cruel acts. Peace and freedom is not held by being naive. Peace and freedom is earned by determined people with means and will to fight for it and to protect it.
In Response

by: Ron from: USA!
July 29, 2012 12:45
To Robert in Detroit.

With you specifically in mind, I wrote this reply to you at a 5th grade reading level in hopes that you might comprehend at least a small portion of my reply to you.

Your very first 3 lines of your above comment on the failed ATT only serves to prove what a non-thinking IDIOT you are. What kind of brainless numskull are you? It's no wonder the US has problems around this issue with idiots that don't have any common sense yet can still vote.

Firstly you stated, "I agree that we should ban guns as that means there will be no more gun crimes."

WTF? Did I just read that right? Criminals will ALWAYS find a way to get arms in hand. "Criminals"... Do you even know what that word means?

Secondly, you stated, "We have banned cocaine and there is no more cocaine in this country. Including meth, marijuana......
Drinking and driving is outlawed."

What fantasy world do you live in? Oh wait, I know... you live in a hole with your head stuck up your _ _ _. Because that's the only way you couldn't possibly see the reality of your statements.

I'm almost afraid to read further than the first 3 lines of your above comment in fear I may just be overcome by your stupidity.

OMG, I can't go on after reading this line above "We tell the people that guns are banned and I know those hardened criminals will understand and comply and register their weapons the same day the announcement is made"

I cannot afford to waste any more of my valuable time on such a deranged person's comments. It's a good thing you're mentioned in "Darwin’s theory of natural selection". The only complaint I have about it is that it's not happening fast enough.

Now go back and bury your head in your hole again. You're better off there anyway.
In Response

by: Josh from: USA
July 29, 2012 14:13
Hey Ron. Sorry to bug ya, but Robert's post was 95 percent irony. One of his last sentences is," The answer is not more gun laws if we really want to fix the problems."

You guys are actually on the same side! I almost didn't catch it either, but the further I read, the more I realized it.

Anyhoo, Peace! :)
In Response

by: Sam from: usa
July 29, 2012 14:18
to Ron from USA
you really need to read Robert's full comment
In Response

by: Happy GIlmore from: Houston
July 29, 2012 14:23
Ron,,from USA,
apparently you dont want to admit where your from probably California...
you should have read his rant completely then you would have known how stupid you now look.
he was being Facetious......
Have you ever heard that word? maybe a new word for you, so I'll spell it out for you, in as you put it:

“With you specifically in mind, I wrote this reply to you at a 5th grade reading level in hopes that you might comprehend at least a small portion of my reply to you".

Facetious = teasing…..
he was teasing you moron….he’s against gun control, the whole thing was “tongue in cheek”,
It was a joke…

hope this helped but after reading the rest of your reply your probably not reading on a fifth grade level anyway…

You should go and thank your parents for allowing you to remain in the gene pool, castration was invented to prevent people like you.

BTF if I had caught my boys using “WTF “ as fifth graders, I’d be pissed and likely beat them… oh wait… I’d have given them a time out,,, cause we all know that works
In Response

by: MeNoGoodEnlish from: WASHINTON SATE
July 30, 2012 00:26
Too..Funny how some "educated" people misunderstand things, I did not even go to high school and I understood you completely right from the get go. Oh and I am a gun owner too.
In Response

by: Happy Gilmore from: Houston Tx
July 29, 2012 14:26
Robert J from: Detroit, MI (USA)
your spot on
to bad some idiots (IE Ron from USA) cant see the humor in your post
In Response

by: Ron from: USA TEXAS
July 29, 2012 20:47
LOL! "Happy Gilmore" Just to veer off topic just a smidgen since you're so interested where I'm from dude, I'm from TX..., Dallas to be most specific. In light if me obviously not reading your entire post Robert, I do digress. I know that's a big word for you Gilmore, but it's OK. My apologies to you specifically Robert. Have a great day Robert.

by: Wyatt Larew from: Austin TX
July 28, 2012 14:51
1.2 million people die from car crashes every year world wide!That is 3,287.67 people per day. Guns don't kill people. People kill people! being that 1200 more people die daily from automobile fatalities lets ban OIL and Cars!!!!!!!!! It kills just too many people period! So this is Bogus!

by: logan from: Virginia
July 29, 2012 15:37
Ron you obviously dont know Robert in Detroit was using SATIRE. Of course he knows banning guns wont stop crime. That is why he followed it with the cocaine line so even the dimmist of bulbs could keep up. He is trying to show how absurd the UN argument is.
In Response

by: Ron from: Texas
July 29, 2012 20:53
All -

Yes, yes, I realize that I goofed and hastily posted the initial comment to Robert. Let's not carry this further than it has already gone. I have already apologized to Robert and admitted the fault. I appreciate everyone pointing it out to me. ;-)

Most Popular