11 Jun The Transnationalist Obama Administration, Except on Treaties
John Bellinger has a nice op-ed today pointing out that the 112th Congress is on course to set a record for the fewest treaties ratified during a single session of Congress.
Despite the presence of 59 Democrats, the Senate has approved only one treaty (a tax agreement with France) during the 112th Congress. The Obama administration must make more vigorous efforts with respect to the many important treaties awaiting Senate approval.
In fact, as I pointed out back in February and in May, the administration has only submitted three (now four, including the new START arms reduction treaty) treaties to the Senate so far. As Bellinger points out,
The Obama administration took office promising a “return” to the U.S. commitment to international law. Obama officials have publicly supported Senate passage of various multilateral conventions, including the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (neither of which the Bush administration supported). But as time has passed, the Obama administration’s commitment to the ratification of treaties has taken a back seat to health care and other legislative priorities. Sadly, the White House made no effort to obtain Senate approval for the Law of the Sea convention last year, when the political opportunity for passage was greatest (because the Democrats had both a cloture-proof majority for several months in a non-election year and political momentum after Obama’s win).
Meanwhile, several other important treaties await Senate action, including agreements to limit illegal trafficking in firearms, dumping of waste at sea and production of toxic chemicals. All of these deserve vigorous support from the administration.
I actually don’t mind that the Administration hasn’t submitted the Law of the Sea Treaty or CEDAW or other treaties since I am unsure whether those treaties are really all that important or necessary. But the fact that the Administration likely to submit fewer treaties during its first four years than the first George W. Bush Administration should caution us against simplistic assessments of the two presidents as being either pro or anti-international law.
It seems as if quite a few of this President’s campaign promises are falling by the wayside or taking much longer than expected to fulfill.
I think the number of new treaties sent over for senate consideration is not as important a gauge of a presidents commitment to international law as is the measure of how seriously a president takes the treaty commitments we already have and whether he/she has policies consonant with those commitments. On that more valid gauge, I think Obama is head and shoulders more obviously committed to international law than Bush was.
Dan Joyner
The Obama Administration did not need to submit the LOS Convention to the Senate. Under the rules of the Senate, the LOS Convention was automatically referred back to the Foreign Relations Committee for consideration at the beginning of the 112th congress. The Administration did include the Convention with, I believe, 16 other treaties and conventions as their “priority” list. What Mr. Bellinger refers to is the failure of the White House to take action beyond preparing the priority list that was sent to the SFRC by the Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs. Efforts by Senators Lugar and Kerry were unsuccessful at gaining any support for action from the President in spite of strong endorsements from the Secretary of State, the Navy, the Coast Guard, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the QDR and new National Security Strategy. Failure of the President to back up the support from these sources is being taken as a tacit decision not to pursue approval of the LOS Convention in spite of bipartisan support in the Senate, support from industry and support from the military. The question is: if he won’t take up a convention with this kind of support against a small… Read more »
Response…
What John Bellinger, who watched John Yoo, his boss, and others in White House National Security Council’s Principals Committee meetings in 2002, 2003 and 2004 argue for and approve specific torture techniques such as waterboarding, is that the Obama Administration tends to comply with treaties whether or not they seek ratification of additional treaties.