Why is the US so reluctant to ratify UN conventions?

Nov 8, 2023
United Nations General Assembly at the UN headquarters in New York

The US is reluctant to ratify international conventions despite endlessly expounding on the importance of all countries abiding by the vague Rules Based International Order (RBIO).

I have a direct and personal interest in the reluctance of the United States to ratify United Nations Conventions, arising from my involvement of over two decades in the negotiations of World Health Organisation’s one-and-only treaty, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), and the subsequent Conference of Parties’ (COP) meetings.

The FCTC came into effect two decades ago, and reads like sensible and established public health policy, including monitoring, smoke-free areas, bans on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship, price policy, education, pack warnings, assistance with cessation, exclusion of the tobacco industry from policy decisions, and articles on farming, illicit trade, liability and more.

With 183 Parties to the Convention, the FCTC has become one of the most rapidly embraced UN conventions of all time.

The US participated in all the planning meetings, signed but then refused to ratify the Convention, becoming one of only a very few countries which have either not signed or ratified the FCTC. In contrast, every country in the Western Pacific region of WHO has ratified the treaty.

Signing only creates an obligation to refrain, in good faith, from acts that would defeat the object and the purpose of a treaty. Signatories have access to all information and can attend COP meetings as ‘States Non-Parties’ Observers.

Ratification means a state consents to be bound by a treaty, becoming known as a Party to the Convention.

Treaties and other international agreements are written agreements between sovereign states (or between states and international organisations) governed by international law. There are a total of more than 560 UN conventions which cover a broad range of subject matters such as human rights, health, trade, defence, protection of the environment and even road signs!

Many were puzzled as to why the US did not ratify the FCTC, especially as the treaty aligned so closely with tobacco control action already undertaken throughout the United States.

The United States may enter into more than 200 treaties and other international agreements each year but, despite this seemingly impressive number, the United States is often notably absent from the lists of state parties to globally significant treaties.

It has failed to ratify treaties that tackle biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions, protect the rights of children and women, govern international waters or protect health. In fact, according to a 2022 article entitled ‘On international treaties, the United States refuses to play ball,’ published by the Council on Foreign Relations, the United States has ‘one of the worst records of any country in ratifying human rights and environmental treaties.’

For example, the US has failed to ratify crucial human rights documents such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), or the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The latter entered into force in September 1990, and has been ratified by 196 countries, including every member of the United Nations except the United States.

The US has ratified or is otherwise bound to only a handful of treaties in their entirety, including the Genocide Convention, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).

The United States has played a critical role in drafting numerous international treaties and documents on human rights. But, a major concern voiced by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is that the United States has consistently utilised the U.N. treaty mechanism of attaching Reservations, Understandings, and Declarations (RUDs) to its ratifications, which dilutes the effect and enforceability of these universal human rights documents.

During the FCTC negotiations on tobacco, the non-governmental associations gave out ‘Marlboro Man’ awards to the countries that were behaving most like the tobacco industry in the negotiations, in other words trying to sabotage and diminish the treaty. Three countries consistently came top of the list: the US, Japan and Germany. Paradoxically, this united many low and middle-income countries which felt they were not going to be browbeaten, and this actually helped get the treaty through. An astonishing statement came from the Indian delegate: “Public health cannot be bought.”

The US has a history of undermining international organisations and existing agreements. For roughly two years, the United States has blocked the appointment of new judges to the World Trade Organisation’s Appellate Body. This has driven the dispute settlement system to a halt and thrown into doubt the WTO’s role in enforcing multilateral trade rules.

The United States shuns treaties that appear to subordinate its governing authority to that of an international body like the United Nations. The United States consistently prioritises its perceived national interests over international cooperation, opting not to ratify to protect the rights of U.S. businesses or safeguard the government’s freedom to act on national security and, in the case of the tobacco treaty, its people’s health.

One practical barrier is that while presidents can sign treaties, ratification also requires the approval of two-thirds of the Senate. This is often influenced by special interest groups and party power and politics which, on top of existing concerns of sovereignty, almost guarantees U.S. opposition to treaty ratifications.

This shame of it is that ratification hesitancy is causing an impairment to international U.S. partnerships, status, credibility and influence.

 

If you enjoyed this article, please consider a donation to support Pearls and Irritations.

You can make your one off donation or take up a monthly subscription here.

Share and Enjoy !