The Lasting Effects

Disclaimer: I know the assignment was to analyze different news sources on a certain event or issue, but I searched a great deal and came up with nothing! All media that I found agrees in saying child soldiering needs to end. Therefore, I'd like to focus on the effects that the act of child soldiery has on the rest of the world (which I referred to in my first article).

The word 'soldier' should never follow the word 'child'. Yet, our world has decided differently. The fact that 300,000 children in our upcoming generation are being used as weapons is repulsive.

This blog is about the lasting long term effects of having child soldiers in the world; whom it effects and how.

Firstly, the most obvious is the many effects it has on the child him/herself. These children are abused and/or exposed to things that hurt them physically, mentally, and emotionally.

The physical effects of warfare (on any soldier) are apparent. We can see them. Children are often used in immensely dangerous missions because they are often thought of as 'expendable' or 'inferior' to the older soldiers. An example of one of these missions is this:

A former Burmese rebel child combatant recalls that at age sixteen his job was to run into no man's land and "grab weapons, watches, wallets and any ammunition from the dead soldiers, and bring it back to the bunkers... This was a difficult job as you could see the enemy and they could easily `pick you off' as you ran out and back again." [The Defense Monitor]

After warfare many children are left with missing limbs, head injuries or lost eyesight or hearing. The terrible scars that are visible on the outside pale in comparison to the deep psychological and mental damage that is left for them to hold for the rest of their lives.

At such a young age, children are very malleable. Their minds are in a critical developing process and very susceptible to outside influences. Therefore, being surrounded by (and participating in) violence and the many horrors of war has lifelong lasting impressions.

"Perhaps the most severe long-term consequences of children serving as soldiers may be on their moral development. When the fighting ends and children return to society, it is very difficult to place them in the more sedate surroundings of schools or families. Their moral system is dominated by fear of violence from whomever is superior in the hierarchy. Child soldiers find it difficult to disengage from the idea that violence is a legitimate means of achieving one's aims, and find the transition to a non-violent lifestyle difficult." [The Defense Monitor]

Moving on to the greater circle which is effected by child soldiers.. The effect is rippled from the area in which children are/have been used as weapons in warfare to outer regions, lapping the far corners of the world. Because of the deep psychological damage that is done to the children, it creates a mindset centered around violence that is easily distributed and manipulated.

So, although usually found in desolate areas away from extreme media attention and much of the public eye, child soldiering effects much of the world by leading a terrible example for other countries and spreading sickly ideals around the globe.

Works Cited

"The Defense Monitor." CDI - Center for Defense Information - Security Policy Research Organization. Web. 30 Mar. 2010. .">.

Insights on the Convention of the Rights of the Child

Twenty one years ago, UNICEF guaranteed human rights for every child on this planet. The Convention of the Rights of the Child, a "binding treaty of international law", declares that ever child has a right to health care, education and other social necessities. As well as protection from sexual abuse and other physical abuse, child labor, and, of course, being exploited for the use of armies (as child soldiers).

UNICEF recently did a study in 51 countries that showed that since the commencement of this treaty many of the countries have changed their laws to protect children from harm. For example, many areas have banned female genital mutilation and 'caning', and promoted education programs for girls (China View).

This treaty is the most widely accepted treaty in the world. Yet, in order for this treaty to be enforced in a country, it must be signed and ratified by it's government. In the entire world there are only two countries whom are yet to ratify the treaty: Somalia (who doesn't have an active government to ratify to bill) and the United States of America.

The difference between signing and ratifying:

SIGNING/SIGN: In human rights the first step in ratification of a treaty; to sign a Declaration, Convention or one of the Covenants constitutes a promise to adhere to the principles in the document and to honour its spirit.

RATIFICATION/RATIFY: Ratification, acceptance and approval all refer to the act undertaken on the international plane, whereby a State establishes its consent to be bound by a treaty. Most multilateral treaties expressly provide for States to express their consent to be bound by signature subject to ratification, acceptance or approval.

It is ironic that we haven't ratified this treaty because many of our "founding documents" -mainly our own Constitution- influenced the CRC in a huge way. Currently, there are many Americans advocating for the ratification of the CRC. They are pressing Barack Obama to sign it by November 10, 2010. Obama has stated that "it is embarrassing to find ourselves in the company of Somalia, a lawless land". During his campaigning, he vowed to review the treaty and "ensure that the US resumes its global leadership in human rights".

The United States government has openly breached the regulations of Article 38 (see below) in that they recruit children at the age of 17 into the armed forces.

"Article 38 (War and armed conflicts): Governments must do everything they can to protect and care for children affected by war. Children under 15 should not be forced or recruited to take part in a war or join the armed forces. The Convention’s Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict further develops this right, raising the age for direct participation in armed conflict to 18 and establishing a ban on compulsory recruitment for children under 18."

Within the media covering this topic, most was in agreement that the U.S. should sign the CNC treaty: BBC, UNICEF, Democracy in Action, Common Dreams, ChinaView (see works cited).

Although, I did find sources who believed that the U.S. should not sign the treaty. The Child and Family Protection Association thinks that the treaty's law would overpower our own states laws, giving too much power to the UN.

"It would have a negative impact on domestic law and practice in the United States... Our nation is the only nation that is required by its own constitution to enforce international treaties, when ratified by the U.S. Senate, upon all of its citizens. Other nations can and often do ignore provisions of U.N. Conventions and other treaties if they conflict with their current domestic laws. Article VI of our Constitution makes ratified treaties, including those called “conventions” by the U.N., “the supreme law of the land.” The CRC would be treated as superior to laws in every state regarding the parent-child relationship. This would include issues regarding education, health care, family discipline, the child’s role in family decision-making, and a host of other areas of life."

There is also an outcry against this treaty within some homeschooling communities in Europe and America. Principled Discovery, a blog of a mother who home schools her children, is opposed to the ratifying of the CRC. She writes,

"This–The UNCRC–is what is being used as a rationalization for home inspection by state officials in which they may speak to children in private without the parents breaking any laws or even being suspected of breaking any laws."

It was insightful to read these opposing views, it opened my eyes to the diversity of opinions on current topics. Although, much of this article did not have to do with child soldiers, it is still linked in the sense that the Convention on the Rights of the Child is a step towards weakening the numbers of child soldiers around the globe.

Works Cited


Deen, Thalif. "US, Somalia Still Opt Out of Childrens Treaty." Common Dreams. 14 Nov. 2009. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. <http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/11/14-3>.

"Human Rights | BBC World Service." BBC. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/ihavearightto/four_b/treaties_children.shtml>.

"The Campaign for U.S. Ratification of the CRC." Democracy in Action. Web. 10 Mar. 2010.

"The Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Use of Child Soldiers." MyMADRE. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. .

U.N. CRC Treaty Attacks Families." Child and Family Protection Association. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. .

"UNICEF - Convention on the Rights of the Child -." UNICEF. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. .

U.S. Advocate: Promoting Children's Rights Makes a Better World." China View. Web. 10 Mar. 2010. .