tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5672498644411374237.post4716791084534787325..comments2023-12-30T03:23:35.965+11:00Comments on Australian Observer: Malcolm Fraser on our cluster munitions legislationPAUL BARRATThttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13447792285944889375noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5672498644411374237.post-65704538947418410222011-04-26T09:17:34.112+10:002011-04-26T09:17:34.112+10:00Australia needs to stand up to the pressures from ...Australia needs to stand up to the pressures from the US policy makers. The treaty that bans Cluster Munitions exists for one solid reason, to totally and permanently ban the very existence of Cluster Munitions. No ifs, no buts, a total ban. Australia's proposed legislation comes no where near this goal. The draft bill on offer is a crafty document of legal omissions that will only legitimise the future use of this weapon system. This will not bring about an end to this weapon. Australia was an erosive force at the treaty negotiations and this negative influence still exists today. It shows a complete lack of commitment to creating a strong treaty. If Australia wants to legitimise the future use of Cluster Munitions then they should simply stay outside of the treaty along with the US, and other rogue states. Malcolm Fraser understood the catastrophe that Cluster Munitions are and was spot of with his analysis. Its a pity our current leadership is not of his calibre.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5672498644411374237.post-67188242291821962812011-04-26T07:46:30.097+10:002011-04-26T07:46:30.097+10:00Why should Australia oblige by their signature to ...Why should Australia oblige by their signature to an International treaty? Why can't Australia just have its cake and eat it too?<br /><br />Hearing Australia defending their right to assist using cluster bombs indicates Australia is not ready to join this treaty yet. Then it is better to stay outside the treaty. It is all good to make national legislation that regulates the use of cluster bombs, but the international convention is about making a ban on cluster bombs. <br /><br />Australia wants to look good to the world and its people, and signs a treaty. However it is in fact doing dirty work on behalf of USA by weakening the convention, risking becoming a bad example to be followed by other signatories that have not yet ratified the convention. <br /><br />Nicholas Gruen calls for economic solution. Good if the perpetrator would be morally obliged to pay for damage done. There are victims in the process trying to sue USA for the damage done to them by the cluster bombs that US dropped.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5672498644411374237.post-65808631285558265222011-04-24T15:42:58.112+10:002011-04-24T15:42:58.112+10:00I'm surprised you're not editorialising th...I'm surprised you're not editorialising this more Paul. The issues seem pretty clear to me. We should do what Fraser says. While Bob Hawke was easily the best PM in my lifetime, and a disappointment as ex-PM, Mal wasn't that flash as PM but certainly the best ex-PM we've had in a long while.<br /><br />Also, looks like an economic solution would be nice. The country responsible for the unexploded bombs should be footing the bill for the peacetime carnage. Victims should be able to sue.Nicholas Gruenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08979019731787830666noreply@blogger.com