Social justice news
April 2000
This month in U.S. Catholic:
41 bright ideas for going green; Green isn't just for Ordinary Time and much more! Visit or order U.S. Catholic!
Feed your mind!
Get social justice news from Salt of the Earth!
Get U.S. Catholic! A sampling of our monthly features
Breaking news from U.S. Catholic! Daily news of interest to U.S. Catholics.
Other Claretian Publications:
Busy Christian's Guide
to Catholic Social Teaching
Context
Hispanic Ministry resources
De Buena Fe/In Good Faith
Homefaith.com
U.S. Catholic
Tell a friend about Salt of the Earth
U.S. about-face on children soldiers
Will embassy bomber face a federal death warrant?
Clinton/NRA gunfight at the not-OK corral
Is homelessness back to haunt us?
Volunteer boom leads to bust
Minimum wage increase stalled by tax cut proposal
The tax man cometh!
US about-face on children soldiers
Thanks to an about-face on the issue by the United States, new international guidelines against child soldiers were approved by 50 countries in January. The United Nations protocol agreement will raise the minimum age for soldiers from 15 to 18.
The Clinton administration and the Pentagon, which had long insisted that the United States be allowed to send volunteers as young as 17 into combat, changed its position after strong domestic and international pressure. "It was becoming clear that the United States was very isolated in its position," said Jo Becker, advocacy director of the Children's Rights Division of Human Rights Watch. The organization is one of many NGOs which have joined the international Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers.
The treaty is an optional protocol to the nearly universally-ratified Convention on the Rights of the Child. (Only the US and Somalia have failed to ratify it.) That document defined a child as any person under the age of 18, but maintained 15 as the minimum age for recruitment into the military and deployment into conflict.
Becker noted that the policy shift on child soldiers marks the first time the United States has ever agreed to change its practices in order to support a human rights standard. In other cases, such as the Landmine Ban Treaty, the US has either refused to ratify or has exempted itself from the law.
The Pentagon accepted a compromise on the child soldier agreement that would allow the armed forces to continue recruiting and training 17-year-olds as they do today, but take "all feasible measures" to keep them out of combat until they turn 18. Seventeen-year-old soldiers were deployed in Somalia, the Gulf War, and Bosnia, according to Becker.
President Clinton called the agreement "an important advance for human rights," but noted that it also "fully protects the military recruitment and readiness" of the United States.
But Becker believes it will force a change in US policy. "The United States will be under an obligation to take measures to assure that under-18s are not assigned to combat units," she said.
Human Rights Watch estimates that 300,000 child soldiers—some as 10 or younger—serve as soldiers in conflicts around the world, from Chechnya to Colombia to Sierra Leone. Many are kidnapped or coerced into killing, raping and maiming, while others are lured by promise of booty or revenge.
U.S.-made lightweight weaponry makes it possible for young boys to be armed, while the children's unpredictability is seen as making them better fighters. Child soldiers are cheaper to feed, less demanding, and more easily manipulated.
Although the most egregious violators are unlikely to sign the U.N. agreement, the international standards are expected to help stigmatize the use of children in combat. And raising the minimum age will protect adolescents in areas where 12-year-olds without age documentation are passed off as 15-year-olds.
"We're never going to get 100 percent compliance, but this gives an added measure of protection," Becker said, adding that US support was crucial. "The US isn't going to put pressure on other governments if it's not willing to abide by it as well."
Before governments can begin to ratify the protocol, it must be adopted by the UN General Assembly, which Becker expects this summer, at the earliest. Supporters should contact the White House and Congress to encourage its ratification.—Heidi Schlumpf
For more information
Stat House:
statistics on children soldiers
Will embassy bomber face a federal death warrant?
At least one of the three suspects in the 1998 embassy bombings in East Africa is likely to face the death penalty, but an execution in this case could jeopardize US relations with Muslim countries and heighten tensions with Islamic fundamentalists.
More than 200 people died in the bombings that took place on the same day in Kenya and Tanzania. The terrorist act has been linked to Osama bin Laden, a Saudi who is currently living under the protection of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Bin Laden has been accused of leading a conspiracy targeting Americans abroad.
| For more information about the death penalty and current legislation: The Death Penalty Information Center Catholics Against Capital Punishment Amnesty International |
In a strange turn of events, the suspects' lawyers recently sent a memo to White, Reno, and top-level state department officials arguing that it would be self-defeating for the US to execute the defendants. The memo points out the diplomatic problems that an execution might lead to. The lawyers argued that putting bin Laden's lackeys to death indicates that the US would also seek the death penalty if he were brought to prosecution. The lawyers claim this would put Muslim nations in an awkward situation as they cooperate with US efforts to track bin Laden.
Complicating the matters are indications that al-'Owhali was on a suicide mission as a passenger in an explosive-filled truck that rammed the US embassy in Nairobi, Kenya. Putting him to death might be considered a glorious martyrdom rather than a life spent in prison.
"The very fact that the United States will have designated these defendants for execution will guarantee that their pictures will be held aloft over crowds of protesters," the memo, as reported by the New York Times, said. "Babies will be named for them, and young men from Morocco to Pakistan will make plans to emulate them. Their actual executions will ignite outrage and protest in many Muslim countries and will ignite outrage and protest in many Muslim countries, and will leave a legacy of further violence and revenge."
Dan Misleh, policy adviser on nonviolent issues at the United States Catholic Conference, said that if the US attorney seeks the death penalty in the case of the terrorists it would hardly come as a shock to other nations. "The rest of the world knows that we solve most of our complicated problems with violence," Misleh said.
Although federal legislation has broadened the number of crimes that can be punishable by death, bills have also been introduced from the other end of the spectrum, Misleh said. In 1999 Senator Russ Feingold sponsored a bill that would abolish the federal death penalty, and so far in 2000 Senator Patrick Leahy and Congressmen Bill Delahunt and Ray LaHoodd have introduced legislation that would ensure defendants have good legal representation and allow more DNA testing to be used during the appeals process.
"Efforts are under way that would curtail the death penalty or at least get it right, but there is a mixed message at the federal level," Misleh said.
The case comes as support for the death penalty seems to be waning within the US Illinois governor George Ryan began a moratorium on his state's death penalty in January after the thirteenth Illinois death row prisoner was exonerated—one more than has been executed in Illinois since the 1976 reinstatement of the death penalty. Other states are considering similar moratoriums.
A recent Gallup Poll found that 66 percent of Americans favored the death penalty, the lowest percentage since 1981. When those surveyed were given the option of putting criminals in prison for life without parole the number in favor of the death penalty fell to 52 percent.
Clinton-NRA shoot-out at the not-OK corral
It's been almost a year since the dreadful events at Littleton,Colorado, but America's gun laws remain substantially the same—despite recent verbal shoot-outs between President Clinton and the National Rifle Association. But while the president and Charleton Heston make the rounds on the political talk shows, more and more gun control supporters are taking matters into their own hands. Some are even taking it to the streets.
On Mother's Day, thousands of gun control supporters are planning to march on Washington D.C.. Dubbed the "Million Mom March," the May 14 event aims to recruit mothers, grandmothers, stepmothers, godmothers, foster mothers, future mothers, and "all others willing to be 'honorary mothers' in this crusade."
"For too long we have ignored the gun violence epidemic because it was always in somebody else's back yard," says Donna Dees-Thomases, the march's organizer. She applied for a permit to demonstrate on the National Mall after watching yet another school shooting on the television news. "We cannot afford to ignore it any longer. Our children's lives are far too precious."
Among the gun control measures supported by the Million Mom March organizers are
• a "sensible" cooling-off period and background checks;
• mandatory licensing and registration of all guns;
• safety standards such as built-in locks, loaded-chamber indicators, and childproofing;
• a one-gun-per-month limit on sales of firearms;
• "no-nonsense" enforcement of gun laws;
• and support from corporate America in arranging gun-swaps in which collected guns are destroyed.
They are calling on Congress to enact such legislation before Mother's Day. At the march, they will either celebrate their success or "protest bipartisan ineptitude," according to their website. Word has it that a counter-demonstration is planned by the Armed Informed Mothers (AIM, for short), an offshoot of an organization called the Second Amendment Sisters.
Meanwhile, citizen groups in three western states are bypassing legislators—whom they believe are too influenced by the NRA's heavy ammunition—and are collecting signatures to put gun control issues directly before the voters as ballot initiatives this fall. In Utah, the proposed initiative would deny people who have permits to carry concealed weapons from taking their guns into churches and schools. The Colorado and Oregon efforts both aim to close the loophole that excludes people who buy guns at weekend gun shows from criminal background checks. Those initiatives emerged after gun show-loophole bills failed in the state legislatures.
As long as lawmakers continue to be influenced by gun lobbyists, citizens will have to "try anything, including ballot initiatives, to protect themselves from gun violence," Senator Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey told the New York Times.
A barrage of rhetoric about gun-control issues has erupted over the past month, with President Clinton and the NRA engaged in a virtual war of words over the issue. The White House and the NRA traded accusations of "harassment" over the issue after Clinton challenged Congress to pass what he called "commonsense gun control" before the April 20 anniversary of the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton, Colorado.
The NRA responded by criticizing the While House for "the complete collapse of enforcement of existing federal gun laws." But even NRA supporters were shocked when the organization's executive vice president, Wayne Lapierre, claimed Clinton was "willing to accept a certain level of killing to further his political agenda."
The NRA was dealt another blow when Smith & Wesson—the nation's largest handgun manufacturer—agreed to require child-resistant safety locks, background checks, and other limits on handgun purchases. In return, Smith & Wesson will be dropped from several lawsuits by nearly 30 cities and counties against gun manufacturers for damages from gun violence in their communities.
A representative from the Legal Action Project of the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence, which represents nearly every city and county suing the gun industry, called the agreement "a breakthrough for public safety" and said it "will save lives."
President Clinton also praised Smith & Wesson's "courage" for signing the agreement and added that he hoped it would become a model for the industry.
Religious leaders also are joining forces in the fight against guns with an Interfaith Call to End Gun Violence, which was released March 15 in Washington. The National Council of Churches (NCC) added its support to the project and announced that it would be making gun violence one of its top priorities in the next few years.
"We are aware that new laws alone will not end the wave of gun violence sweeping the nation," said NCC general secretary Robert W. Edgar. "But we are convinced that the number of shootings will be reduced by making it harder for individuals to purchase the kinds of guns which have no function except to injure and kill humans."
Two bishops from Colorado—Richard Hanifen of Colorado Springs and Arthur Tafoya of Pueblo—added their names to the interfaith effort. The US bishops have supported gun control measures in the past, both in a 1995 statement on "Confronting a Culture of Violence" and in their 1975 statement, "Handgun Violence: A Threat to Life."
"The unlimited freedom to possess and use handguns must give way to the rights of all people to safety and protection against those who misuse these weapons," the bishops wrote in the 1975 statement. "For this reason, we call for the effective and courageous action to control handguns, leading to their eventual elimination from our society."
The 1975 handgun statement, which called for registration, licensing, and a "cooling-off" period, will most likely be updated in the next year to reflect recent safety developments, such as trigger locks and "smart guns," according to Dan Misleh, policy advisor on nonviolence issues for the Social Development and World Peace Department of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops/United States Catholic Conference.
"Clearly these guns are dangerous and a threat to human life," said Misleh. "So we see gun control as a life issue."—Heidi Schlumpf
Salt news |
In session |
Stat house |
Salt links |
Idea exchange | SOTE Self-help zone |
Salt shakers |
Salt archives | Back to main