The Associated Press reported this morning that the US and Russia are the only two nations that have refused to sign a 92 nation ban on the use of cluster bombs. They follow-up by pointing out that even Afghanistan has signed.
The between-the-lines story is that it's morally repugnant that the US won't sign, that even Afghanistan will sign. It's a bit of a despicible story, really. I mean, how often have you read about the US using cluster bombs? I don't know that we ever have. So what useful purpose will our signing such a treaty serve?
Frankly, I find such treaties to be a waste of time, and nothing more than "feel-good" diplomacy. If, in fact, cluster bombs are inhumane, then it stands to reason that a reasonable nation, interested only in protecting their country, will refrain from using them regardless whether they've signed this treaty.
On the other hand, a country (or terrorist group) who couldn't care less about humanitarianism is not likely likely to honor such a ban--whether they've signed or not.
So even if the US signs, has this agreement done anything to make the world a better or safer place? Probably not.
Why don't we forget about the feel-good diplomacy and focus on doing things that really matter?