newsroom

TODAY Thursday 18 September 1997 Each weekday. Conn Nugent on what's new in the world, on the site.

 

TODAY IN THE WORLD: Dr. Pangloss and the Land Mine Treaty

On the face of it, the President took an interesting decision yesterday when he instructed the American delegation to refrain from signing the treaty prohibiting land mines. Though it can't be said that significant numbers of voters were exercised over the issue, a ban on anti-personnel mines seemed to enjoy good press and public approval, particularly in light of the attention called to the issue by the death of Princess Diana. At least in the short run, the President's already-high approval ratings would only have moved upward.

But Bill Clinton simply does not pick fights with the Pentagon unless he has to. And he seems to be particularly careful to avoid a ratification brouhaha with the US Senate. Yesterday's announcement was pointedly praised by Jesse Helms. "He has made the right decision," said the Piedmont potentate, "even though it may be misunderstood in some quarters."

What should not be misunderstood is that the most-cited excuse for not signing -- to protect American troops in Korea -- is intellectually threadbare. The scores of thousands of anti-tank and anti-personnel mines sown over the Demilitarized Zone would indeed provide protection and time to American and South Korean troops hit with an invasion from the North. Seoul is perilously close to the line. But it's really a budgetary question. Warning times could be easily but more expensively provided by electronic means, and extra protection could be purchased through the deployment of standard but expensive weapons systems (not to mention the anti-tank mines that would still be legal under the treaty). It also might be said that there is no military analyst anywhere who says the North Koreans have a snowball's chance against the South. An invasion may not be impossible -- war gamers spin scenarios of a desperate North starving to death, risking all on a throw of the military dice -- but it would surely be suicidal.

No, the Pentagon likes anti-personnel mines because they're cost-effective and because the potential enemies that matter -- Russians and Chinese -- aren't about to give them up, either. If you're Boris Yeltsin, by the way, facing an expanding NATO on your borders and a hapless, underfinanced military within, do you agree to give up a military technology well suited to inexpensive defense from land invasions? If there's logic on the side in mines in Korea, there's surely logic on the side of mines next to Estonia.

And why does Bill Clinton not want to cross the Pentagon? Here, patient readers, is where the environment comes in. Let us take the most optimistic view of things. Let's say that the President figures that the mine-banning treaty is a step forward for humanity, but that the US is better positioned to bring along the Russians and Chinese (and the Indians and Pakistanis) as a hard-nosed non-signatory. The last thing he needs is a Wilsonian gesture opposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and sure to arouse a televised circus of super-patriotism in the well of the Senate. History is on the side of the land-mine treaty, he might say to himself, I have to concentrate my energy and my persuasion on the treaty where I can make an enormous difference -- the climate change treaty.

On Monday President Clinton met with leaders of environmental organizations to talk about climate. "The President made it very clear that he believes that global warming is the most serious environmental problem the world is facing and that the United States must take the leadership role," said Phil Clapp of the Environmental Information Center. No promises were made, and the President is clearly working hard to fashion some kind of Middle Position that both enviros and business leaders can swallow. It may be that this President is amassing as big a pile of chips as he can for the time when the big climate-treaty poker hand is dealt next spring in the Senate.

 

TODAY ON THE SITE:

Just because we worry about overpopulation doesn't mean we've got anything against the little chiselers. Many of the Liberty Tree regulars have procreated more or less successfully. Latest and maybe best is Susan Alexander of San Francisco, from whom a daughter recently emerged, and who has added a new High Five on Pregnancy and Parenting.

 

Recent "Today" columns:

9/17: Outsourcing Pollution
9/16: In the Preservation of the Funky
9/15: The Problem With Health
9/12: The Automobile Crisis of 2020
9/11: Gratifyingly Inept Adversary
9/10: The Porkbarrel Works for You
9/09: Climate Change Changes
9/08: More or Less Voluntary Simplicity
9/05: Man Bites Cougar
9/04: Logging

To access more "Today" columns, click "Archives" below.