And Then There Was One
As celebrations around the world today marked the 20th anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Somalia announced that it would ratify the accord. The United States is now the lone country not backing the most widely supported international human rights treaty.
Of course, there’s a gaping discrepancy between word and deed; as the BBC reported: “Unicef, the UN's children's agency, welcomed the announcement and reminded the Somali government that ratifying the convention was a commitment to protect children's rights.” But the symbolic value is significant, and as an American I find our stance a little embarrassing. If we weren’t signing because we’re concerned that the popularity of the treaty was watering down its significance, we would have an argument to make. But unless the U.S. is willing to make this more principled point heard loud and clear, why bother being the loner?
Technorati Tags: 
re: And Then There Was One
Exactly twenty years after enacting the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child, the world is one step closer to being united in their claim to protect the rights of children world wide. The response of Mark Kornblau, that the current administration of the US, will review the convention, can be interpreted as a refusal to take up the issue. No administration will want to burn its fingers on this issue. There are three main reasons for the non-ratification of the UNCRC by the US. First of all there is the self-proclaimed notion of American exceptionalism that stands in the way of ratification. Secondly, he convention defines the rights of children, which in some articles runs against the notion of parental rights. Finally, the United States has nothing to gain by signing the UNCRC.