UK PLC – and the Labour government – are going through some hard times right now. All the more reason, then, for Messrs Brown, Miliband and colleagues to capitalise on the genuine triumph of the global ban on cluster munitions – a triumph in which they, with the support of the country, played a decisive role. Countless lives and limbs will be saved because of this new treaty and the UK must make its ratification a priority within the coming legislative agenda.
Why should the Convention on Cluster Munitions be considered a success? First the treaty’s ban is comprehensive. As such, it will stand for future historians as a landmark in the evolution of international humanitarian cooperation. It bans the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of cluster munitions as a whole category of weapons – all cluster bombs, always. This comprehensive approach is critical for the stigmatisation of the weapon. A weak regulation with the exceptions some states sought would not establish a norm to curb the behaviour of those outside the ban.
Second, the treaty is a holistic solution by not only banning the weapon, but providing for clearance, victim assistance, stockpile destruction and international cooperation and assistance.
Third, it improves on the 1997 mine ban treaty, in particular on victim assistance. The broad definition of a victim and standalone obligation to assist victims based on the human rights approach in the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities have been universally welcomed by affected states.
Fourth, the treaty is largely preventive. Countries like Lao PDR have suffered too much already, but only a tiny proportion of the billions of submunitions stockpiled worldwide have ever been used. Many states were motivated by the need to act now in order to prevent more countries from suffering the fate of the Lao people and to prevent a problem that might have eclipsed the global scourge from landmines.
Fifth and finally, the process itself has shown how to conduct international diplomacy effectively and get tangible results. The partnership between states, civil society, the UN, ICRC and international organisations was crucial; the process was driven by affected countries and by survivors themselves; and the negotiations were rooted in humanitarian and development realities, with rigorous research, reliable data and rational arguments.
The UK’s role in this success was vital. As the past decade’s third largest user of cluster munitions and the largest stockpiler amongst negotiating states, the UK was a lynchpin. In the final week of negotiations in Dublin last year Gordon Brown’s decision to ban all British cluster munitions had a sensational effect on negotiating states. Once the UK had decided to back the treaty, other states, in particular key NATO and US allies, were certain to follow. Now Brown must follow up on his leadership in Dublin and Miliband’s signature in Oslo last December with the same leadership to make ratification a priority and see the process through as a high priority in the coming legislative agenda.
And here is the crunch. The government must ensure that the UK’s cluster munitions bill is high on parliament’s legislative agenda. To fail to do so would be, senselessly, to risk losing the opportunity action in which the country as a whole will take great pride. To be sure, inclusion of the cluster munitions prohibition bill in the draft legislative programme is welcome, but time is short with two deadlines on the horizon. First is the election to be held at the latest in May next year. Failure to ratify this treaty would be one of the more unfortunate pieces of unfinished business given that it has been heralded as a centrepiece of Brown’s leadership on questions of global importance. Second is the First Meeting of the States Parties to the Convention most likely to take place in November next year in Lao PDR. If the UK is to participate fully in this meeting, it must ratify at the very latest in May 2010.
Swift ratification is a priority, but must not be done at the expense of strong legislation upholding the spirit and letter of the ban. Central to this must be a clear, unqualified prohibition on UK assistance with prohibited acts. The treaty allows for military cooperation with states outside the treaty, but it does not allow UK troops to assist with any prohibited acts those partner states may undertake. Just as it is not allowed for UK troops to assist with acts of torture banned under international law, it must not be allowed for UK troops to assist with the use of cluster munitions banned under international law.