I'm not a lawyer, especially on international law, but from common sense.... in our own country we have an age of majority. We switch from being a child to being an adult and we become responsible and culpable for our actions. We have that cut-off point where we think we're fully matured and we have developed.
To take away the notion...or to delink “child soldier” and not look at the context these children are operating in is treating them as mini-adults, meaning they are accountable and responsible with obligations just from a legal point of view, while not recognizing their vulnerability, dependency, and lack of ability to choose otherwise. There is no choice, obviously, within their circumstances. This is not legal or political, but it's not a very compassionate, rehabilitative way to go, I wouldn't think.
As you mentioned with Sierra Leone and whatnot, there was a more compassionate understanding of the predicament these children were in. There were attempts to try to reintegrate them into society so they would have productive, useful lives, versus rendering them as criminals.
I think that's the difference. Do we treat them as children who need support and help to find their way out of those wars and to deal with all the atrocities, or do we treat them as criminals and put them in jail without looking at the circumstances they live in?
I'm sorry, that wasn't a legal or a political thing; it was more of a social kind of--