The following are editorial opinions from newspapers from around the world which may be of interest to Royal Gazette readers.

San Jose Mercury News,

on Obama's landmines decision

President Barack Obama will collect his Nobel Peace Prize on Dec. 10 two weeks after his administration announced a decision not to join the global treaty banning landmines. He shouldn't get away without having to reconcile the glow of Oslo with that deadly, heartless and inhumane decision, another sign that the president's peace prize may have been premature.

Landmines caused more than 5,000 casualties in 2008, many of them outside current war zones.

More than a third of the victims were children. If the United States can support treaties against the use of chemical weapons and other atrocities, surely it can ban devices that keep on killing the innocent years after a war is over.

More than 150 nations, including the majority of our Nato allies, have signed the treaty.

Even Iraq, Afghanistan and Colombia have signed. But not China. Not Russia. And not the United States.

It's a disgrace.

This country has a stockpile of more than 10 million landmines.

Ian Kelly, a spokesman for the State Department, told reporters that the United States "determined that we would not be able to meet our national defence needs nor our security commitments to our friends and allies if we signed this convention."

We have not used landmines since the 1991 Gulf War.

The notion that our security rests on them now is ludicrous a distortion of reality unworthy of a president who claims to want to restore US stature in the international community.

US officials backtracked a bit on their position last week after humanitarian groups exploded in rage.

They now say the policy again is "under review."

What's left to review?

The civilised world agreed more than a decade ago that these weapons have no place in modern warfare.

The Asahi Shimbun, Tokyo,

on world hunger

The United States will host a summit meeting in April on nuclear security. The gathering will discuss ways to prevent nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation, mainly by strengthening measures against theft and black market sales of nuclear fissionable materials that can be used to produce nuclear weapons.

The idea had its roots in President Barack Obama's landmark speech in Prague last April on nuclear weapons. While announcing his intent to seek "a world without nuclear weapons," he said that nuclear terrorism is "the most immediate and extreme threat to global security." ...

In November, following summit talks in Tokyo between Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Obama, the two leaders issued a joint statement in which they stressed the importance of bilateral cooperation on nuclear security. The policy should gain as much ground as possible.

Obama has expressed concern that if one nuclear device exploded in a major city such as New York, Paris or Tokyo, it could not only kill a large number of people but also throw the international community and the global economy into upheaval. His fundamental recognition that nuclear terrorism is a genuine threat cannot be understated. It is also correct to expedite measures to deal with the threat. We must spread this common recognition that prevention of nuclear terrorism is essential for the stability and prosperity in this age of globalisation.

In Japan, there is concern about North Korea's nuclear program and China's nuclear strategy. They are, of course, serious matters, but Japan should at the same time grapple more with the US concern about nuclear terrorism. It is time, as a key ally, for Japan to make every possible diplomatic effort to alleviate Washington's concern about the threat of nuclear terrorism. ...

The China Post, Taiwan,

on US troop levels in Afghanistan

The United States has been criticised over the years for acting as if it were the world's policeman. The US has had a mixed experience with nation-building or rebuilding. The Marshall Plan and subsequent reconstruction efforts in Germany and other parts of Europe after the Second World War is credited by many as saving Europe from a decent into anarchy. But after years of success on the battlefield, hubris set in and the US was forced to learn a very costly lesson about trying to remake nations in the quagmire of the Vietnam War. ...

US President Barack Obama is winding down operations in Iraq while quite possibly boosting troop levels in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is now being called Obama's war, but unless the entire international community realises that this conflict is a global problem, it may be very difficult to bring even a semblance of normalcy to this troubled region. ...

Obama's political team may have stopped using the term "war on terror," but the reality is the US military is trying to defeat Islamic extremists that are overwhelmingly responsible for inspiring the sorrow and carnage many nations of the world have suffered over the past decade.

China has been singled out for criticism as it has business and commercial interests in Afghanistan and the surrounding area, but is loath to actually join the fight against extremism. For political reasons, it's unlikely that China will be sending any troops anywhere soon, but every nation in the world needs to get in on this fight. Those who can send troops should do so. Others can contribute money or provide other assistance. America isn't perfect, but what's the rest of the world doing to help defeat extremism?

Calgary (Alberta) Herald,

on foreign-trained workers

Monday's deal between Ottawa and the provinces sets the framework for recognising or rejecting credentials of foreign-trained workers. It's a huge victory for the Canadian economy, immigrants, potential immigrants, the health-care system and employers seeking to position themselves for the economic recovery. ...

Under the Pan-Canadian Framework for the Assessment and Recognition of Foreign Qualifications, professionals educated abroad will be told within a year whether or not their credentials will be recognised in Canada. The first eight professions include architects, registered nurses, engineers, financial auditors, pharmacists, occupational therapists and physiotherapists. Six more will be added to the list by 2012.

The deal, criticised by one immigrant group as a Conservative "feel-good" announcement, is far more significant than a political play for votes. It's a big step toward removing harmful inter-provincial barriers that restrict the movement of professionals, whether Canadian-born or immigrants educated outside the country. Such barriers to a resource as valuable as our people hurts Canada's economy and limits international trade opportunities. ...

Studies show the Canadian economy is losing between $2.4 billion and $15 billion a year because of its failure (or inability?) to recognise international credentials of potential workers. ...

The new program is a job well done because it promises timely handling of requests and is a solid effort to closely match people's ability with employment. That leads to a healthier, more productive and happier society.

The Times, London,

on Nicolas Sarkozy's economic diplomacy

"Unlike any French president before him," wrote Agnes Poirier, the French political commentator, last year, "Nicolas Sarkozy hasn't understood that universal suffrage has elevated him above all parties and trite bickering."

Trite bickering is an apt characterisation of President Sarkozy's economic diplomacy. He said yesterday that the nomination of a French EU commissioner would promote the European economic model over the Anglo-American one. In his view, the appointment of Michel Barnier, a former agriculture minister, as Internal Market Commissioner represented "victory" over the City of London. Mr. Sarkozy thereby simultaneously misunderstood the nature of the international economy, the function of the EU, the role of financial services in promoting growth and — not least — the dignity of his own office.

Mr. Sarkozy was elected president in 2007 on a message that he was an economic reformer committed to cutting taxes, curbing union power and promoting enterprise. But the greatest financial crisis since the 1930s has caused a radical re-evaluation in his thinking. A fortnight after the collapse of Lehman Brothers last year, he declared that financial capitalism was coming to an end and denounced as a "mad idea" the power of unconstrained markets. ...

Mr. Sarkozy plainly interprets a crisis in one segment of the economy, finance, as a crisis of unregulated capitalism. It is not. The crisis was created not by markets but by incompetence in the most regulated part of the financial system: the commercial banks. French banks were as culpable as any: Societe Generale lost billions of euros owing to a rogue derivatives trader.

The notion that the French Government should now use the institutions of the EU to rein in the City of London is deeply irresponsible. For reasons of history, language, location and expertise, London specialises in financial services. That is a source of strength for the UK economy, which is an integral part of the European single market. Mr. Sarkozy should cease bringing discord where there ought to be harmony.