.jpg)
In light of all of the recent violence we’ve been witnessing within the United States, mainly the blatant use of guns against innocent civilians, I felt it was appropriate to bring up the treaty that Secretary of State, John Kerry, recently signed. This treaty, set up by the UN, is an attempt to better regulate global arms sales, which are currently a $70 billion global trade. The treaty, something that was developed back in April, aims to have the sales of weapons monitored and judged based on whether they will,
“be used to break humanitarian law, foment genocide or war crimes, abet terrorism or organized crime or slaughter women and children.”
The treaty, already agreed upon by more than 100 other countries thus far, would basically force the sellers of weapons to think about how the people or groups who purchase these weapons will use them, and force them to make this information public. When the United Nations General Assembly first voted, overwhelmingly, to approve such a treaty back in early April, the head of arms control for Oxfam International, Anna MacDonald, expressed early concerns about Syria when their death toll was around 70,000. This was before another 30,000 deaths, and before the chemical weapons situation. MacDonald had stated that while no treaty could solve Syria’s problems overnight, it could help prevent future “Syria’s.”
Even though the treaty will take a lot time before it can be considered an international law, and even more time before its ideas could actually be kept in check, it would allow all of the nations of the world to begin to develop moral and political guidelines regarding conventional arms. The UN, and all of the countries who have backed the treaty so far, are hopeful that such a treaty will begin to lessen the affect these arms have on crime in the world such as terrorism, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. However, the most recent development involves getting the treaty into effect, and this is the challenging part. In order to get this treaty rolling, 50 member countries, including the United States, need to ratify the treaty. The problem? Only 6 have done so thus far.
Now, I’m sure many of you are wondering if this will infringe on your own rights to carry a concealed weapon, or even to bare arms. The topic of gun control has been a very popular and controversial one recently within our country, however, this treaty does not aim to take those rights away from you at all. In fact, it respects these rights. After all, not only are we a country founded on the basis of rights for each individual, we are also one of the world’s main arms exporters of arms (responsible for about 80 percent actually) and we wouldn’t sign something that would put our own economy in greater stress than it already is. And of course, as we have witnessed many times, members of the Senate are already beginning to disagree--part of the Senate has already begun opposing the treaty, despite that:
“experts and officials say the treaty won’t impose any new requirements on the federal government or American companies because laws and regulations already require American manufacturers to comply with a comprehensive export control system that is designed to keep weapons away from human rights abusers and other bad actors. The treaty’s main impact will be felt elsewhere as other countries adopt comparable standards and rules.”
This treaty would be a way in which all world governments could begin to work together to reduce crime world wide, and is the first major arms accord since the 1996, when the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was passed, and covers all conventional weapons, not just nuclear weapons. So why should we be proud of this treaty and its goals? Well, because guns and other weapons are not just a problem for innocent victims within third world countries, or those battling within the middle east, they are a huge problem for members of our own country, and innocent civilians worldwide. If we can begin to monitor the intentions of those who are purchasing weapons across international borders, we can begin to put a stop to gun violence that occurs on a daily basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment