Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Foreign Affairs
Related: About this forumKerry voices conditional U.S. support for U.N. arms treaty
Source: Reuters
Kerry voices conditional U.S. support for U.N. arms treaty
By Louis Charbonneau
UNITED NATIONS | Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:23pm EDT
(Reuters) - Secretary of State John Kerry voiced his support on Friday for an international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global arms trade, but restated Washington's "red line," affirming that it will not accept limits on U.S. domestic gun ownership.
The U.N. General Assembly voted in December to hold a final round of negotiations March 18-28 on what could become the first international treaty to regulate international weapons transfers after a drafting conference in July 2012 collapsed because the United States and others wanted more time.
Arms control campaigners say one person every minute dies worldwide as a result of armed violence and a convention is needed to prevent the unregulated and illicit flow of weapons into conflict zones fueling wars and atrocities.
"The United States is steadfast in its commitment to achieve a strong and effective Arms Trade Treaty that helps address the adverse effects of the international arms trade on global peace and stability," Kerry said in a statement.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
By Louis Charbonneau
UNITED NATIONS | Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:23pm EDT
(Reuters) - Secretary of State John Kerry voiced his support on Friday for an international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global arms trade, but restated Washington's "red line," affirming that it will not accept limits on U.S. domestic gun ownership.
The U.N. General Assembly voted in December to hold a final round of negotiations March 18-28 on what could become the first international treaty to regulate international weapons transfers after a drafting conference in July 2012 collapsed because the United States and others wanted more time.
Arms control campaigners say one person every minute dies worldwide as a result of armed violence and a convention is needed to prevent the unregulated and illicit flow of weapons into conflict zones fueling wars and atrocities.
"The United States is steadfast in its commitment to achieve a strong and effective Arms Trade Treaty that helps address the adverse effects of the international arms trade on global peace and stability," Kerry said in a statement.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/15/us-arms-treaty-usa-idUSBRE92E12N20130315
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 867 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Kerry voices conditional U.S. support for U.N. arms treaty (Original Post)
Eugene
Mar 2013
OP
That would depend on what "regulate" means, I doubt it means no arms trade at all.
bemildred
Mar 2013
#2
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)1. Would it follow from that
any international aid the US provides would no longer be in the from of arms of any description ?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)2. That would depend on what "regulate" means, I doubt it means no arms trade at all.
It's probably more about trying to put the free-lancers out of business, always a noble goal for current rulers, as protection of incumbency is for the currently elected in our politics.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)3. I meant
aid that is supplied in the form of military equipment such as to Israel.