October 2, 2012

So your country commits a war crime that should cut you off from US taxpayer money? OBAMA WAIVER! [Darleen Click]

On the White House’s own site


SUBJECT: Determination with Respect to the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008

Pursuant to section 404 of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 (CSPA) (title IV, Public Law 110-457), I hereby determine that it is in the national interest of the United States to waive the application of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the CSPA with respect to Libya, South Sudan, and Yemen; and further determine that it is in the national interest of the United States to waive in part the application of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the CSPA with respect to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, to allow for continued provision of International Military Education and Training funds and nonlethal Excess Defense Articles, and the issuance of licenses for direct commercial sales of U.S. origin defense articles; and I hereby waive such provisions accordingly.

You are authorized and directed to submit this determination to the Congress, along with the accompanying Memorandum of Justification, and to publish the determination in the Federal Register.


And the press ignores it.

Evidently this is the third year in a row Obama has done this via executive order.

Bush signed the child-soldiers law in 2008. It prohibits U.S. military education and training, foreign military financing, and other defense-related assistance to countries that actively recruit troops under the age of 18. Countries are designated as violators if the State Department’s annual Trafficking in Persons report identifies them as recruiting child soldiers. The original bill was sponsored by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL).

Obama first waived the sanctions in 2010, the first year they were to go into effect.

h/t Purple Av

Posted by Darleen @ 7:08am

Tags: , , , ,

Comments (11)

  1. Other cultures consider people of age 13 and up adults (6 and up for sexual use, if you’re a certain “prophet”). Barack’s merely being sensitive and non-judgemental toward their differences. If you don’t give kids guns and put in them in battle, you hate children. Don’t hate children, give them RPGs.

  2. I don’t get this. How can he either a. believe this is a good idea or b. (and always the most important thing to Obama) How could this help him bribe groups to vote for him ?

    Is there some kind of big lobby for countries advocating the use of child soldiers?

  3. How many countries that use child soldiers also don’t have an extradition treaty with the U.S.?

  4. Overall, [Samantha] Power wanted to point out that the administration is still intent on fighting the use of child soldiers and that waiving the sanctions doesn’t mean that all pressures will stop. She promised that if these countries don’t shape up, the administration will take a tougher line when reevaluating the sanctions next year.

    That was 2010. They lie. What’s the big deal?

    Oh, and the “justification memo” pdf The Cable linked is unavailable to view now because, according to the error message “file does not begin with ‘%PDF-‘ “.

  5. Greetings:

    I seem to be of a split mind on this one.

    At sixteen, I was over six feet tall and 195 or so pounds. I was bigger than most of the grown men in my Bronx neighborhood and routinely played sports with and against them. I got my 22 rifle at 12, a shotgun at 14, and a 30 caliber rifle at 16. Neither I nor anyone I knew considered me a “child” anything. So, I certainly see an element of bureaucratic mission creep in the delineated 18 years of age. When I went in the military, I had a buddy who was 17 and who had to have his parents permission to enlist. “Child” soldier ???

    Conversely, this is just more of the Obama regime in action. Make a rule. law, or demand and then see what sorts of boodle flow from subsequent executive “waivers”. Alternatively, when the aforementioned aren’t available, well, let’s come up with an executive order or two and see what shakes out.

    Corruptors corrupt. It’s what they do.

  6. The reason we don’t want teenagers enlisting in the military is that it makes military action so much more tempting. If I knew that the teenagers on my block were going to be fighting in it, I’d start a dozen wars before suppertime.

  7. When I went in the military, I had a buddy who was 17 and who had to have his parents permission to enlist. “Child” soldier ???

    Did the US military kidnap you? Were you swept up off a street corner and press ganged at gunpoint into joining? Were whiners in BCT simply killed and dumped in a ditch as an example to the rest?

    Yea, I didn’t think so.

  8. 11B40, these are actual kiddo child soldiers or about six years of age we’re talking about.

    Kind of like the ‘splodey six year olds in Vietnam. There are lots of them in Afghanistan, too.

  9. Greetings: especially “leigh” and possibly “PurpAv”

    The point I was trying to make was that the “legal” definition refers to those 18 years old or younger. In that typical bureaucratic expand the empire kind of way, they go way past what the majority of people would think of as a child.

    Certainly, use of actual child soldiers, say pre-teens, should be a punishable offense, but I always worry about the transnational levithan that is trying to devour or at least weaken the old USofA.
    When I see how we are bombarded with claims of “disproportion” or violation of the “rules of engagement”, I worry that this is another tool that will be turned against us in the future.

  10. I’m sympathetic to 11B40’s arguments, though I understand the counterarguments and grant their validity. I just think it interesting that under the arbitrary Congressional rules, our nation would be forbidden from helping the kids in Red Dawn. Would you deny Patrick Swayze the training he so desperately needs to liberate his people?