Though often criticized for his poll-blown policy shifts, President Clinton deserves praise for reversing his position on a voluntary international treaty to ban the use of antipersonnel land mines. It’s a change of heart that is both humanitarian and pragmatic.

For more than a year, the administration has refused to participate in the voluntary country-by-country treaty, known as the Ottawa Process, insisting that a global ban through the United Nations was the only way to go.

Meanwhile, some 110 million deadly leftovers of war remain buried in 68 countries, killing 800 civilians a month and maiming another 1,200. Meanwhile, the UN has done nothing to ban the insidious, indiscriminate weapons. The leading manufacturers of land mines, led by China and Russia, have blocked even putting the issue on the agenda.

The president announced Monday that the United States would be among the 150 nations negotiating the Ottawa treaty as it continued to work for a global ban through the UN.

That is putting the cart and the horse in the proper order. A universal ban is the desired end, but the world must not be held hostage by a few nations driven by the profit motive. At best, the Ottawa Process sets a moral standard all nations may one day rise to meet. At the very least, it helps ensure greater safety for people in 150 nations.

What led the president to change his mind is unclear. Perhaps it was the persistence of Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, who has lobbied against land mines for years. Perhaps it was the support given Leahy by 60 other senators, including Maine’s Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins. Perhaps it was the high-profile efforts by Princess Di. Perhaps it was just the heartbreaking photos of one-legged children in Bosnia and Cambodia.

While the president’s announcement is welcome, the United States still may subvert the Ottawa Process if it continues to insist that the voluntary ban include an exemption for the border between North and South Korea. The argument for the exemption — that land mines there serve an essential defense purpose — could be made by any nation with a hostile border and fails on two points: the largest threat the North Korean government poses today is to its own starving people; and children on both sides of the 38th Parallel deserve a chance to grow up with both legs.