Now if the USA passed some law, making compliance mandatory, then that is something we can change. But I fail to see where signing that convention makes non compliance illegal in some way. Like wiki said, enforcement has never been attempted in seventy plus years.

There are things that are illegal that lack an enforcement mechanism - that doesn't make them not illegal, it just means that there's not a legally enforceable consequence for doing the illegal thing. International law is a really, really complex subject for exactly that reason - nearly every obligation or commitment in international law lacks an enforcement mechanism that parallels what you would find within a national legal system. That doesn't make them disappear, though. And even when there isn't a formal enforcement mechanism in a treaty, countries are properly reluctant to willfully violate their treaty obligations, because it makes it harder for them to entice other nations to enter into agreements and/or comply with existing agreements.

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.