Rights Group Slams Obama on Land Mines

By: Sergey Kadinsky
Topics: Domestic Issues

(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

A leading human rights organization today harshly criticized President Obama for failing to sign on to the Mine Ban Treaty. The treaty, which has been approved by 158 countries, bans the use, stockpiling, production or transfer of land mines.

"President Obama's decision to cling to antipersonnel mines keeps the U.S. on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of humanity," Steve Goose, Arms Division director at Human Rights Watch, said in a released statement.

The international campaign against land mine use drew attention in part thanks to the efforts of Princess Diana of Wales, who died in 1997. Since its introduction in December of that year, 158 countries have signed on to the Mine Ban Treaty, including all but two Western Hemisphere countries and all but one NATO member.

The United States remains among the prominent holdouts, alongside China, India, Iran and Russia. The only other holdout in the Americas is Cuba.

Although the U.S. ended its production of land mines by 1997 and vowed to eventually sign the treaty, Mr. Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush, declined to sign onto the treaty. The Obama administration held a review of U.S. policy on land mines before announcing that he would stick with the current position.

"We made our policy review and we determined that we would not be able to meet our national defense needs nor our security commitments to our friends and allies if we sign this convention," State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said at a press briefing yesterday.

Critics slammed the policy review, noting that both Afghanistan and Iraq are signatories to the treaty, which prevents the U.S. from using land mines on their soil.

"This was a stealth review, conducted in complete secrecy," Goose said. "We can only conclude that this was very hasty and cursory. It's a black eye for an administration that supposedly prides itself on transparency."

The administration's rejection of the treaty was also criticized within Mr. Obama's party.

"This is a default of U.S. leadership and a detour from the clear path of history," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt, in a statement. "The United States is the most powerful nation on earth. We don't need these weapons and most of our allies have long ago abandoned them."

The announcement comes a week before an international conference on the Mine Ban Treaty, to be held in Cartagena, Colombia from Nov. 29 to Dec. 4. The U.S. will attend the event as an observer, the first time it has officially participated in a formal Mine Ban Treaty meeting.

11 Comments +

Add a Comment See all 11 Comments

by GTR5 November 29, 2009 6:40 AM EST

This comment is totally false.

Reply to this comment


by billards53 November 29, 2009 7:24 PM EST: The claymore mine was used for perimeter dafense and was made to be placed in a safe condition and then redeployed .It is a much better option than anti-personnel or anti-tank mines which are left in place and sometimes forgotten . Innocent people die as a result .Thanks steve 8313


by steve8313 November 27, 2009 4:33 PM EST: Any one remember we're fighting 2 wars right now? You don't send a soldier to a conventional war and tell them that they can't use all their conventional weapons. As much as mines are terrible when civilians are killed, they are a very valuable tool in the right locations and just because other countries use them improperly let's not deprive our soldiers of the ability to shape the battle zone as they need.; Reply to this comment

by nestofkin November 25, 2009 8:44 PM EST

This is really bad for Obama.

Reply to this comment


by earlysaid November 27, 2009 12:19 AM EST: There is no good reason for President Obama not to agree to sign this Mine Ban Treaty. I am a big supporter of this President, but he must make decisions that are good for us all. This is a very bad decision and one that he should get a lot of heat for.


by 50BMS13 November 27, 2009 4:23 AM EST: earlysaid
The USA is the largest producers of landmines in the world. $$$$$$

by Johnococo November 25, 2009 8:31 PM EST

What a disappointment Obama is. I voted for him, but so far he hasn't really come through with any of his promises. This is especially sad, land mines are truly made by evil madmen for bad purposes. The US should sign the agreement. Obama should have brought this up publicly before deciding.

Reply to this comment


by billards53 November 29, 2009 5:05 PM EST: Once they neutralize them selves a terrorist can pick it up take it home and remove the explosives .Unless the landmine is binary , which means two chemicals are mixed just before detonation you are only making the matter worse . Presaident Obama should ban land mines from US stockpiles over a period of time if other governments also ban their manufacture .


by billards53 November 29, 2009 5:12 PM EST: If a landmine self neutralizes it will be easy for a terrorist to remove the explosives in it and then reuse them . A binary system where two harmless chemicals are mixed to become a high explosive before detonation is not a good option either .It can still be made into an explosive device and land mines are indiscriminate killers to start with . Obama needs to go stand in the corner on this one .

by us_1776 November 25, 2009 4:50 PM EST

All weapons need to be designed with a self-neutralization system that kicks in after a couple years so that these munitions do not end up killing so many hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians for decades after these conflicts end.

Reply to this comment