Finland to leave anti-personnel mine treaty
April 2 (UPI) -- Finland joined other European nations in abandoning a long-standing treaty that bans the use of anti-personnel mines.
Finnish president Alexander Stubb announced Tuesday that his country "will prepare for the withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention," based on what he described as "a thorough assessment by the relevant ministries and the Defense Forces."
Ministers of Defense from Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland announced jointly in March that their countries would no longer observe the Ottawa Convention, or Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention, which was ratified in 1997.
The U.N. stated that since the treaty was signed, it has "led to a virtual halt in global production of anti-personnel mines, and a drastic reduction in their deployment."
The joint statement released from Poland and the three Baltic states said "military threats to NATO Member States bordering Russia and Belarus have significantly increased," and that due to "Russia's aggression and its ongoing threat to the Euro-Atlantic community, it is essential to evaluate all measures to strengthen our deterrence and defense capabilities."
Stubb did not directly connect Finland's withdrawal to Russia, but it too shares a border with Russia, and Russia's war with Ukraine is high among Finnish concerns.
The nonprofit Human Rights Watch noted Tuesday that Russia has not banned the use of anti-personnel landmines and alleges "Russian forces have used anti-personnel landmines extensively in Ukraine since 2022."
With the withdrawal of Finland from the Ottawa Convention, Norway is now the only European country that borders Russia but remains a member of the treaty.
"'I regret Finland's intention to withdraw from the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention," said Norway's Minister of Foreign Affairs Espen Barth Eide in a press release Wednesday.
Despite the plan to leave the Ottawa Convention, Stubb added that "Finland is committed to its international obligations on the responsible use of mines."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
Spain rejects NATO's anticipated defense spending increase as ‘unreasonable'
MADRID (AP) — Spain has rejected a NATO proposal to spend 5% of GDP on defense needs that's due to be announced next week, calling it 'unreasonable.' In a letter sent Thursday to NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said that Spain 'cannot commit to a specific spending target in terms of GDP' at next week's NATO summit in The Hague. Most U.S. allies at NATO are on track to endorse U.S. President Donald Trump's demand that they invest 5% of gross domestic product on their defense and military needs. In early June, Sweden and the Netherlands said that they aim to meet the new target. Spain was the lowest spender in the 32-nation military alliance last year, directing less than 2% of its GDP on defense expenditure. In April, Sánchez said the government would raise defense spending by 10.5 billion euros ($12 billion) in 2025 to reach NATO's previous target of 2% of GDP. After Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, NATO's 32 allies agreed to spend at least 2% of GDP on their military budgets. But NATO plans for defending Europe and North America against a Russian attack require investment of at least 3%. The aim now is to raise the bar to 3.5% for core defense spending on tanks, warplanes, air defense, missiles and hiring extra troops. A further 1.5% would be spent on things like roads, bridges, ports and airfields so armies can deploy more quickly, as well as preparing societies for possible attack. Rutte had been due to table a new proposal on Friday aimed at satisfying Spain. European allies and Canada are keen to finalize the spending pledge before the summit, and not leave it open for any heated debate that might drag the meeting out. Poland and the Baltic countries — Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania — have already publicly committed to 5%, and Rutte has said that most allies were ready to endorse the goal. A big question still to be answered is what time-frame countries will get to reach the new spending goals. A target date of 2032 was initially floated, but Rutte has said that Russia could be ready to launch an attack on NATO territory by 2030.
UPI
28 minutes ago
- UPI
Same-sex marriage ruling linked to mental health gains
Same-sex marriage supporters rally in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington in 2013. Legal marriage improved mental health for LGBTQ+ couples. File Photo by Kevin Dietsch/UPI | License Photo June 19 (UPI) -- Marriage and the ability to start a family are human rights. Ten years ago, on June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Obergefell v. Hodges case extended the right to marry to same-sex couples. With 7.6% of Americans identifying as LGBTQ+, this decision continues to have an impact beyond legal benefits. Marriage provides unique advantages - a reality we have come to know as psychology researchers who focus on couples. The right to marry allowed same-sex couples the opportunity to experience these advantages. Benefits of a healthy marriage Although evidence largely comes from different-sex couples, psychology research documents the numerous benefits healthy marriage confers on well-being. Married people experience more positive emotions. They also have many physical health advantages, such as being more likely to survive cancer or major surgery. Children of married couples seem to benefit as well. A healthy marriage brings benefits that are distinct even from what couples in long-term relationships experience. Those who are married have better psychological well-being, such as less depression and better physical health than people in nonmarital romantic relationships, even those who live with their partner. Not surprisingly, the benefits of being married do not extend to unhappy marriages. The effects of marriage on physical well-being, life satisfaction, depression and mental health more broadly depend on marital quality, and so do outcomes for children. What's so special about marriage? What makes a happy marriage different from a happy cohabiting, stable relationship when it comes to well-being? Social scientists don't know, but there are a few theories. The one with the most empirical support involves a concept from physics called inertia. Applied in relationship science, inertia describes the idea that a relationship will remain the same or continue moving along the same trajectory unless some outside force acts upon it. As relationships progress, they naturally gain momentum. Partners invest more into their relationship over time. They exchange gifts, meet each others' friends, and start staying at each others' homes. Eventually, a natural step in this progression is either cohabitation or marriage. Marriage is a milestone, marking a new stage in life. Deciding to get married is a long-term commitment that often takes years of planning. Cohabitation, on the other hand, is easy to slide into due to the forward trajectory of a relationship. Cohabitors tend to stay together less as an intentional choice but for convenience. The intentional lifelong commitment of marriage may explain why it offers more benefits than cohabitation. 10 years of same-sex marriage As more same-sex couples have married, are they seeing the same marriage benefits that other-sex couples always had? Research on the topic is only just beginning. Still, there is some preliminary evidence that they are. In a 2024 survey, respondents with same-sex spouses largely felt closer to their partner and more satisfied with life in general after getting married. Findings from one research study indicate that married same-sex couples see greater benefits to psychological well-being than do same-sex couples in registered domestic partnerships. Another study on same-sex relationships found that marriage was linked to greater happiness and fewer depression symptoms than cohabitation. As for children of same-sex parents, they do just as well as those with other-sex parents. There's not much data yet on the impact on kids of same-sex parents divorcing. Do marriage benefits differ for same-sex couples? The happiness of same- and other-sex relationships is largely determined by the same factors, but there are two key differences: gender composition of the couple and stress from discrimination. In other-sex relationships, women tend to fall into subordinate positions. Same-sex couples are free from traditional male-female gender dynamics, allowing more of a balance of power. For instance, they have a more even division of household chores, and partners have a more equal say when resolving conflicts. Greater equality may improve the quality of same-sex relationships. The other distinguishing feature of same-sex couples is that their relationships are negatively affected by discrimination, a known stressor. In research done mostly on different-sex couples, even support from a partner does not ameliorate the downstream effects of discrimination and - as is the case with other stressors - can make relationship problems seem worse. Societal disapproval may lead someone to internalize negative ideas about their own sexuality and relationship. In other words, buying into society's message that one's relationship is morally wrong harms their own mental health and consequently their relationship. Psychology researchers theorize that societal disapproval is a key factor standing in the way of same-sex couples experiencing the full benefits of marriage. More societal acceptance post-Obergefell As an increasing number of U.S. states, and eventually the federal government, legalized same-sex marriage, greater societal acceptance has followed. In 2025, 67% of LGBTQ+ adults agree that the country has become more accepting of same-sex couples due to the legalization of same-sex marriage. This trend is not unique to the U.S. Around the world, countries where same-sex marriage is legal tend to have a higher percentage of the population say they favor same-sex marriage. Although the causal direction is opaque, evidence from multiple countries indicates that same-sex marriage bans reinforce nonacceptance of LGBTQ+ people, while legal recognition fosters societal approval. Acceptance lowers stress for same-sex couples, allowing them to enjoy the benefits of marriage. Although societal acceptance in the United States has improved dramatically over the past couple of decades, it is important to note that 19% of Americans still strongly oppose same-sex marriage. Legalization was a major step, but it has by no means eliminated discrimination altogether. Alana L. Riso is a Ph.D. student in clinical psychology at Binghamton University, State University of New York and Matthew D. Johnson is a professor of psychology and director of clinical training, Binghamton University, State University of New York. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. The views and opinions in this commentary are solely those of the author.
San Francisco Chronicle
42 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Europe and Iran will try diplomacy as US weighs joining fight with Israel
VIENNA, Austria (AP) — Iran's foreign minister will meet in Geneva on Friday with counterparts from Germany, France and the United Kingdom, Iranian state media and European diplomats said, as Israeli airstrikes target his country's nuclear and military sites and Iran fires back. Europe's push for diplomacy is in sharp contrast to messages from Washington, with U.S. President Donald Trump openly weighing bombing Iran and calling for the unconditional surrender of the Iranian leadership. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will travel to Geneva for the meetings Friday, the state-run IRNA news agency reported. European diplomats, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the confidential talks, confirmed the meetings. 'All sides must show restraint, refrain from taking steps which lead to further escalation in the region, and return to diplomacy," read a joint statement issued Wednesday by France, Germany, the U.K. and the EU. The three European countries, commonly referred to as the E3, played an important role in the negotiations over the original 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. But they have repeatedly threatened to reinstate sanctions that were lifted under the deal if Iran does not improve its cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog. The meeting in Geneva could also provide the three European nations with a unique opportunity to reach out to Iran in what is going to be the first face-to-face meeting between Western officials and Tehran since the start of the conflict a week ago. Lammy is flying to Washington on Thursday to meet U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The U.S. may want to use the U.K.-controlled base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean in a potential strike on Iran's underground nuclear facility at Fordo but is not believed to have requested to do so yet. 'The EU will continue to contribute to all diplomatic efforts to reduce tensions and to find a lasting solution to the Iranian nuclear issue, which can only be through a negotiated deal," said Anouar El Anouni, a spokesperson for the European Commission. "This is why, an intense outreach activity involving all relevant sides is currently underway to preserve room for diplomacy and create the conditions for a negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear issue.' Germany says there must be movement from Iran Germany's foreign minister has underlined European countries' willingness to talk to Iran about a solution to its nuclear program, but says there needs to be movement from Tehran. Johann Wadephul said Wednesday that the three European countries, which were part of Iran's 2015 nuclear agreement, 'still stand ready to negotiate on a solution.' But he added: 'Iran must now move urgently. Iran must take confidence-building and verifiable measures – for example, in that the leadership in Tehran makes it credible that it is not striving for a nuclear weapon.' French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said Thursday that France and Europeans partners are ready to 'resume negotiations' with Iran. Barrot did not confirm the Geneva meeting. Iranian authorities' message was 'relatively clear: there is a willingness to resume talks, including with the United States, provided that a ceasefire can be reached,' Barrot said in a news conference in Paris. 'On our side, there is a willingness to resume negotiations, provided that these negotiations can lead to lasting, substantial steps backward by Iran regarding its nuclear program, its ballistic program and its activities to destabilize the region,' Barrot said. No US delegates at the Geneva talks on Friday Trump has given increasingly pointed warnings about the U.S. joining Israel in striking at Tehran's nuclear program even as Iran's leader warned anew that the United States would be greeted with stiff retaliation if it attacks. A U.S. official said Wednesday there no plans for U.S. involvement in nuclear talks set between senior European diplomats and Iran in Geneva, although that could change. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private diplomatic communications, also noted that the Europeans have been wanting to play a role in the negotiations for months but have been held back by the U.S. That position, the official said, may be changing as the hostilities intensify. Israel asserts it launched its airstrike campaign last week to stop Iran from getting closer to being able to build a nuclear weapon. It came as Iran and the United States had been negotiating over the possibility of a new diplomatic deal over Tehran's program, though Trump has said Israel's campaign came after a 60-day window he set for the talks. Iran's supreme leader rejectedU.S. calls for surrender in the face of more Israeli strikes Wednesday and warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause 'irreparable damage to them.' Iran long has insisted its nuclear program was peaceful, though it was the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%. The International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, was still conducting inspections, though limited, in the country. U.S. intelligence agencies as well have said they did not believe Iran was actively pursuing the bomb. ___
