asdf

Disarmament and International Security Committee Chair: Diego Negrón-Reichard

DISEC PMUNC 2016

Contents

Contents ...... 2 Letter from the Chair ...... 3 Topic A: Police Brutality ...... 4 Introduction ...... 4 Relevant International Framework ...... 6 Current Situation ...... 8 Brazil ...... 10 Kenya ...... 12 France ...... 14 United State of America ...... 15 Country Blocs ...... 17 Questions ...... 18 Key Terms ...... 18 Topic B: The International Illegal Arms Trade ...... 19 Introduction ...... 19 Historical Background ...... 19 Current Situation ...... 22 Country Blocs ...... 26 Questions ...... 26 Key Terms ...... 27

2 DISEC PMUNC 2016

Letter from the Chair

Dear Delegates:

Welcome to DISEC 2016! This will be my third year chairing the greatest committee in PMUNC history, so get ready to have intense debates, constant backroom negotiations, and most importantly, fun. My name is Diego Negrón-Reichard, I’m a junior at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton, and my interests include long-distance running, buying everything at Wawa, and just having a good time with my friends. I also happen to be Princeton’s Model United Nations Team (PMUNT) captain; so if you have any questions about collegiate MUN, or just life in general, please ask me! What I am most excited about this year’s DISEC is the relevance and importance of the topics we will be discussing: police brutality and the trade of “small and light weapons,” or SALW, as you will learn shortly. In the United States, we have witnessed the countless murders of civilians by police officers. These encounters, made public and extremely visible through social media, have stirred much controversy and have initiated a wave of protests throughout the nation. However, this phenomenon is not solely an American issue: it is a global problem that this body must address. When it comes to the legal or illicit trade of small and light weapons, this is undeniably a topic that also has universal ramifications. And while much has been said on the topic in the past, little has been achieved. As we will see during committee, there is such a diverse array of stances on the issue that the UN has not been capable of drafting a comprehensive document. This will be the ultimate goal of the committee for this topic. I am confident that you delegates can do this, and am excited to see all the sorts of compromises and negotiations that will take place. What I expect from the delegates are concrete solutions. In other words, what I want to see in your position papers and your draft resolutions are well-researched and specific recommendations and action items. I would rather you write three bullet points with solid solutions, than a paragraph with pretty words. And as a final note, we will go through both topics, so make sure to research both! I have done this for the last two years, and will continue to do so. So, be ready. I want to see good, constant debate. From me and the rest of the dais, you can expect from the strong leadership, respect, and any type of help when requested.

We’re all here to learn and have fun, so let’s get to it!

Best, Diego Negrón Reichard

3 DISEC PMUNC 2016

Topic A: Police Brutality

Introduction

In almost any country, the police are given an extraordinary power. Their unique role in society has, of course, spurred much controversial debate among scholars, law enforcement officials, politicians, and human right activists. When employed in an appropriate, legal, and reasonable manner, the police force can be a useful and necessary aspect of any society. They confer upon the citizens of a nation a sense of security and order.

Nevertheless, when the police’s use of force is unlawful, disrespectful or threatening, whether this perceived threat is real or not, this “…can quickly erode the confidence of citizens in their government, increase crime and violence, and generate a wider dissent and dissatisfaction across communities and countries”1. In a global context, the line between the proper use of force and that which is considered excessive is even further muddled for there are evident differences among nations of what constitutes a lawful, reasonable, excessive, or unnecessary use of force.

Regardless of the time period or region under scrutiny, one can find clear examples whereby forceful tactics stirred controversy and anger. In Central America, the use of mano dura (iron-fist) policies has led to the rise of clandestine youth gangs and oversaturated prisons. In Kenya, the unlawful and excessive pretrial detainment of civilians has led to the incarceration, poverty, and death of countless people, helpless against the brutality of the police state2. In Brazil, “… a combination of official and unofficial statistics indicate that on-

1 Foty, Cherine. "Les Cités, As Favelas, And The Projects: International Law Obligations In Combating Racialized Police Brutality In French, Brazilian, And American Ghettos". N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Aug. 2016. 2 Ungar, Mark. "Latin America’s Police: Advancing Citizen Security?". N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Aug. 2016.

4 DISEC PMUNC 2016 duty Brazilian officers are responsible for up to 70% of all civilian murders”3. Imagine how the statistics would change if we went even further and included the murders committed by off-duty cops. And finally, the recent murders of Philando Castile and Alton Sterling in the

United States by police officers have spurred great media attention and national protests.

Clearly, police brutality is a global issue that warrants the attention of the international community. That is why this year’s Disarmament and International Security Committee

(DISEC), the First Assembly of the United Nations General Assembly (GA), will dedicate its agenda to the topic of police brutality, exploring the array of problems and policy solutions necessary in order to develop a comprehensive plan to tackle the inadequate use-of-force by our nations’ police units.

While it is true that this topic is not traditionally considered within the scope of

DISEC, this is an opportunity to craft original language and international law that will improve the civil and human rights of the world’s inhabitants. That being said, this

Background Guide (BG) will serve as an introductory and reference document to help you, the delegates, start understanding the complexity and severity of the matter at hand. For that purpose, the BG will begin with an overview of relevant international legislation and past policy initiatives, providing somewhat of a historical backdrop. Thereafter, it will go into certain key definitions and concepts that are commonly used when talking about police brutality. Then, the BG will go through current and diverse instances of excessive use of force and its causes. Finally, country blocs will be explained and important questions will be posed.

3 Foty, "Les Cités…”

5 DISEC PMUNC 2016

The best delegates are those who research, provide accurate information on the current state of police brutality in their respective countries and in globe, and propose thorough policy solutions.

Relevant International Framework Several international bodies have already enacted legislation pertaining to the regulation and codification of police behavior. The United Nations, for example, has an extensive list of legislation that deals with law enforcement officials, their rights, and limitations. Firstly, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted by the

UN General Assembly on December 10, 1948, carries several provisions which are indirectly related to law enforcement. Among these, Article 3 guarantees that everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person; Article 5 states that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; Article 9 establishes that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest and detention; and Article 11 provides that everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial.4 Specifically, there are also conventions that more explicitly deal with the subject matter that is of interest to us:

 United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, or Resolution

34/169 adopted by the General Assembly on 17 December 1979, goes in depth into

the regulation of policing work;

 UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of

Detention or Imprisonment;

 UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners;

6 DISEC PMUNC 2016

 UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement

Officials

And there are many others.5 Clearly, there is an extensive list of existing legislation already pertaining to the proper policing of a nation. For that reason, the dais does not expect the delegates to know the exact details of every single document – that would be excessive and unfair. On the other hand, the dais does expect delegates to recognize that there is an extensive amount of existing legislation, and during the drafting process of working papers, reference can be made to these. Fortunately, our friends at Amnesty

International developed in conjunction with police officials and experts the 10 Basic

Human Rights Standards for Law Enforcement Officials6– these basic standards can be considered a simplified version of existing legislation for the purposes of this committee.

Similarly, regional bodies have also adopted legislation related to policing. Drafted in

1950, the European Convention on Human Rights established the European Court of

Human Rights. Any citizen of a member nation that feels that his or her right has been violated can bring suit at this Court. Judgements handed down from this entity are considered binding - Article 3 of this Convention strictly prohibits any type of torture.

Typically, this provision refers to cases of clear police-enabled violence or situations in which citizens and/or criminals are detained in extremely poor conditions.

Finally, it is necessary to address the critics of international law, those same critics that deem international law as useless and ineffective. How is it possible for international bodies to deal with individual cases of as police brutality and racism, when in some cases it cannot even deal with cases of mass genocide? Arguments like these undermine the significant and

5 For a full list of existing legislation, please refer to: "10 Basic Human Rights Standards For Law Enforcement Officials". N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Aug. 2016. 6 Ibid.

7 DISEC PMUNC 2016 various achievements of international human rights law. While it is usually the failures of international cooperation that are highlighted, there are many other positive results that serve as a counterweight. We have seen the creation of ad hoc international tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Romania – “these tribunals were successful in quietly prosecuting mid and high-level offenders of human rights, establishing a historical record of the crimes committed, and allowing for the vindication of victims by their day in court with stark numbers of witnesses testifying”7. The Inter-American Human Rights Court, and the previously mentioned European Court of Human Rights, have ruled on a magnitude of human rights cases, resulting in the future incorporation of international law into domestic law. The 2008 conviction of Floridian Chuckie Taylor for the torture of dozens of Liberians comes to mind for example. The point is, therefore, to debunk the notion that the DISEC body cannot enact change. While undoubtedly there will be many barriers and challenges, the dais is confident that you delegates are capable of coming up with policy recommendations and language that will tackle the contemporary problems we face.

Current Situation At this point, you must be wondering: given the plethora of existing international legislation, why even tackle the issue of police brutality? That answer lies in the fact that the world has greatly changed in the last 20 years, and so, our standards too must change. Not only are police forces even more militarized, but the ever-growing development of technology has led to the dissemination of news of police brutality at a greater pace. That is to say, the increasing use of different recording devices and the availability of instant communication has ensured that instances of police overstepping will not go unheard of all around the world. While in the past “…questionable police behavior involving the use of

7 Foty, "Les Cités…”

8 DISEC PMUNC 2016 force historically may have been kept out of the public consciousness on the whole, with only the police version of it being officially documented and given credence, contemporary technological changes have brought the issue of force to the forefront of public attention”8.

Similarly, as a result of extensive NGO work and the Internet, police abuses in developing countries are everyday more visible. This section of the BG will go through different instances of police brutality and the different manifestations of it throughout the world.

While it is typically believed that police abuse is strictly the use of physical force, the reality is a different one - there are many forms of police brutality. However, before going into a case- by-case analysis of the current global scenario, it is first necessary to go into a discussion of what constitutes the police’s improper use of force.

It is a difficult task to clearly define what constitutes improper use of force. In fact, scholars have struggled for decades over how to exactly classify various forms of inappropriateness, including, but not limited to: excessive use of force, use of excessive force, brutality, unauthorized force, wrongful force, unjustified force, misuse of force, and unnecessary force. While these terms might seem interchangeable, there are nuances between them that warrant attention.

Excessive use of force is defined as “more force than is needed to gain compliance in any given incident”9, while use of excessive force implies the use of force in too many instances. While brutality is a willful and knowingly wrong use of force, unnecessary force is defined as force used by well-meaning officers who are ill-equipped to handle the situation at hand. As you can see, there is a diversity of definitions and terms that can be employed. For the purposes of the committee, one of the goals should be providing a consistent discourse when it comes to the draft resolutions. That is to say, delegates should be able to provide clear definitions for

8 Roy Brown, Gregory. "The Blue Line On Thin Ice: Police Use Of Force In The Era Of Cameraphones, ‘Citizen Journalism’, And Youtube". N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Aug. 2016. 9 Belur, Jyoti. Permission To Shoot?. New York: Springer, 2010. Print.

9 DISEC PMUNC 2016 different instances of police brutality. Just like there are diverse definitions, there are different players. The public, that now more than ever plays a key role in the process of defining what constitutes police brutality, is one stakeholder. Similarly, administrators and legal counselors hold an important position: they set up the framework by which to judge officers for their wrongdoing. And finally, the perspective of the street officer is of upmost importance too. They are the ones risking their lives every day to protect the citizens and the ones which must balance the interests of the two aforementioned groups. The question then emerges: what type of policy can begin to bridge the gap between these different groups? In other words, how can a government come up with a singular and appropriate level of police force that can be understood by all? The basic distinctions and the key players explained, now it is time to move on to different contemporary cases of police brutality.

Brazil Brazil has some of the most extreme and evident manifestations of police brutality. The great majority of the various forms of police brutality in Brazil are not only committed against the poor, but also against non-white citizens.10 That is to say, that just like in many other countries such as the United States and France, there is a layer of racial discrimination implicit in these uses of force. In fact, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and

Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has reported that “… while the Brazilian national average rate of homicide is 28 people per 100,000, black males from age 15 to 24 account for 68.4 homicides per 100,000 victims, compared to whites who represent 39.3 out of 100,000, a difference of 74%”11. In other words, police brutality is clearly linked to a racial question that this DISEC body has to address.

10 Foty, Cherine. "Les Cités, As Favelas, And The Projects: International Law Obligations In Combating Racialized Police Brutality In French, Brazilian, And American Ghettos". N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Aug. 2016. 11 Ibid.

10 DISEC PMUNC 2016

The Humans Rights Watch, in its 1997 report on Police Brutality in Urban Brazil12, outlined the five major types of abuses that take place in the Latin American country, which include: excessive police use of force to respond to non-life-threatening criminal situations; police use of deadly force in the course of massive raids of favelas (slums); police engagement in off-duty murders; disappearances of suspects from police custody; and police use of force that suggest inappropriate use of deadly force. Police practices also include taking the corpses of already dead victims they have just killed, and bringing them to the emergency room for “treatment”. Similarly, policemen tend to issue false reports of victims, claiming that these extra-judicial killings occurred as a result of deadly shootouts with criminals. What this highlights is that there is an evident problem related to transparency. How can a government develop mechanisms of accountability and transparency?

Brazil also has a significant problem with torture, which registers as another form of police brutality. There are have been multiple, verified instances in which law enforcement officials have tortured people in their custody as a form of intimidation, interrogation, and punishment. For example, just between October 2001 and July 2003, the National Campaign

Against Torture, run by the Brazilian central government, reported 1,336 complaints of torture13. Considering that a vast majority of people, fearing retribution from the police force, do not report cases of torture, these numbers can only be larger. The issue of police brutality through torture is so pervasive that the Human Rights Watch claimed in 1997 that

“torture is still a routine practice in police precincts throughout Brazil, a practice that is widely accepted, particularly when a victim is a poor, criminal suspect”14.

There are many other manifestations of police brutality in Brazil. While the previously

12 Ibid. 13 Ibid. 14 "POLICE BRUTALITY IN URBAN BRAZIL". Hrw.org. N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Aug. 2016.

11 DISEC PMUNC 2016 mentioned Inter-American Court of Human Rights has ordered the Brazilian government to update their inhumane prisons, they have yet to do so. Brazilian prisons are the sight of gruesome violence – just in the first four months of 2007, 651 people were killed while in prison15. Additionally, law enforcement officials have been responsible for the deaths of countless street children. And finally, what is most concerning, is the complicity of the administration when it comes to tolerating these types of abuses. There is a general failure of Brazilian officials to prosecute allegations of deaths in prisons, murders, and instances of torture.16 This is true to the point that Brazilian police forces even tend to celebrate this type of unlawful conduct. Brazil is an excellent case study that showcases the various types of police brutality and problems that are on a whole ignored by the Western world: pretrial detainment, torture, extortion, unnecessary use of lethal force, and racial discrimination.

Kenya The police’s abuse of power is a devastating global issue. This reality is especially true in developing African nations, such as Kenya. In many communities around the developing world, law enforcement officials can detain citizens with virtually no evidence to support their claims; which brings to the light the question of arbitrary arrest and detention.

Unfortunately, Kenya serves as a perfect backdrop to understand the complexities that underlie this particular issue. For example, a recent study by the Kenyan Independent

Policing Oversight Authority discovered that nearly 2 out of every 3 felony cases examined that went to full trial, police never gathered sufficient evidence to either charge or convict the accused person17. That is to say, the majority of felony cases did not meet the minimum evidentiary threshold for charging, which refers to the necessary evidence to charge a person

15 "Brazil: Curb Police And Prison Abuses". Human Rights Watch. N.p., 2016. Web. 20 Aug. 2016. 16 "Inhumane, Ineffective, Intolerable: Brazil’S Prison System – COHA". Coha.org. N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Aug. 2016. 17 "POLICE ABUSE OF POWER". International Justice Mission. N.p., 2016. Web. 20 Aug. 2016.

12 DISEC PMUNC 2016 with an offense (“reasonable likelihood of conviction”). In these scenarios, it is easy for officers to frame poor people who have had limited access to formal education in order to get quick convictions. This type of behavior poses a serious threat to traditionally disadvantaged groups within society. Poor people can be imprisoned on the basis of a mere accusation, for being unable to pay a bribe to an officer, or for simply being at the wrong place at the wrong time. The International Justice Mission better expresses the dangers of these situations: “For a family struggling in poverty, imprisonment of an innocent breadwinner means that necessities like food, education, shelter, clothing and medicine can slip out of reach. They may be forced to relocate to even more insecure housing, or take their children out of school to work, all because they cannot afford the fees. Most families cannot afford to even visit their loved ones in prison”18. And without access to legal counsel, detainees may be held up for years at the will of law enforcement officials. As a matter of fact, experts have found instances in which Kenyan prisoners have been detained for up to

17 years before being allowed a trial. Another issue those wrongfully detained face is the fact that most of the legal proceedings are conducted in the official language of the state, which isn’t spoken by a vast majority of rural communities. Evidently, there are numerous barriers to a fair trial in these developing countries, barriers which this DISEC body must address: transparency, legal counsel, health access, unfair detainment, etc.

The Kenyan Independent Policing Oversight Authority also found that in a survey conducted in February 2013, 30% of the respondents said that they had experienced some form of police misconduct, which can include: assault/brutality, falsification of evidence, bribery, and threat of imprisonment within 12 months prior to the study. An interesting

18 Ibid.

13 DISEC PMUNC 2016 finding of the report also highlights that only 30% of those who experience these indecencies actually reported the incidents. Specifically, more respondents of rural areas

(68%) experienced some sort of police brutality than did those in urban centers. There is a stark divide in the experiences of rural and urban communities, and we must ask ourselves how to deliver proper law enforcement services to these secluded communities when drafting different working papers. Finally, not only do civilians not report instances of police brutality, but police officers themselves, in fear of retribution from higher officials, do not report police brutality. Of the police officers surveyed, 53% admitted to have witnessed some form of police brutality. However, only 32% of officers actually reported the incidents.

How can we think of ways for police officers to report the issues without being victimized?

What channels can be established to incentivize people to come forward with these reports?

The Kenyan case study, therefore, is a good example of the diverse challenges ahead.

France Following the culmination of World War II, France received a massive influx of immigrants from the Maghreb region, of mostly Arab and Muslim origins, that helped rebuild the torn down nation. These immigrants moved to the cités, or the ghettos, at the outskirts of Paris. The youth in these cités, French citizens who are the children and grandchildren of immigrants, are subject to constant ill-treatment and police brutality19.

Living in unemployment and rampant poverty, these citizens are forced to participate in provocative identity checks by police officers patrolling the cités, a practice that often results in violence. Amnesty International reports that “the French government ministers, judges and senior police officers are allowing members of the police force to use excessive and

19 Foty, Cherine. "Les Cités, As Favelas, And The Projects: International Law Obligations In Combating Racialized Police Brutality In French, Brazilian, And American Ghettos". N.p., 2016. Web. 19 Aug. 2016.

14 DISEC PMUNC 2016 sometimes lethal force against suspects of Arab and African origin without fear of serious repercussions”20. Those detained are often denied access to a lawyer, to medical treatment, visits from family members, and psychologically abusive interrogation techniques. And given the recent incorporation of terrorism exceptions into these detainment and interrogation procedures, police officers remove many of the guaranteed rights by the Constitution under the guise of suspected terrorism. Additionally, the militarization of the French police adds a whole new layer to the fear and intimidation aspects of the situation. In the end, like in many other countries, members of the DISEC body, police brutality and police conduct in France is undoubtedly linked to racial concerns.

United State of America It has been the recent events in the United States that have triggered much of the contemporary discussions on race, police brutality, and citizen participation. With the new widespread availability of instant recording devices, ordinary citizens have been able to document instances of police brutality and expose them to the general public. Americans all know the names of the victims: Alton Sherling, Philando Castile, Sandra Bland, Eric Garner,

Anthony Nuñez, Michael Brown, and many others. In fact, by the time this BG is made public, several names would have to be added to make this list complete – that is the reality of the United States. Black and Latino Americans constantly face harassment from police officers. In fact, the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice receives about 8,000 complaints per year, of which 75%-85% involve incidents with police officers, mostly pertaining to people of color21. Clearly, and there are many other alarming statistics,22 the issue of police brutality is inextricably linked to race. However, given that it has been already

20 Ibid. 21 "Addressing Police Misconduct Laws Enforced By The Department Of Justice | CRT | Department Of Justice". Justice.gov. N.p., 2016. Web. 20 Aug. 2016. 22 http://mappingpoliceviolence.org/unarmed/

15 DISEC PMUNC 2016 discussed through previous case studies, the US case study will primarily focus on legal frameworks, militarization, and the use of lethal force. Currently, all 50 states, Washington

D.C., and U.S. territories fail to meet international law and standards of lethal force use by law enforcement personnel. Several states do not even have any provisions pertaining to the use of lethal force. In other words, the United States lacks a proper legal framework that explicitly outlines the proper instances in which lethal force is permissible. It is then not a surprise that the majority of deaths caused by cops involves some type of firearm. Not only is a legal framework lacking, but officers do not receive the proper psychological and emotional training necessary to deal with complicated situations. The majority of the budget allocated to law enforcement divisions goes towards covering the salary and the weaponry of the division, and not towards the training of these officers. Policy experts have argued that by more heavily focusing on the training of officers, much of the contention can be avoided

(such as introducing implicit bias training as an obligatory module in police training academies).

On a similar point, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) conducted a study in

2014 that concluded that policing, especially through the use of paramilitary teams, has become increasingly militarized in the United States23. This phenomenon is mostly due to the currently existing federal programs that incentivize state and local enforcement divisions to adopt excessively aggressive weapons and tactics designed for the battlefield. For example, approximately 500 agencies have received Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, engineered to survive roadside bombings. We see how SWAT teams have, and in doing so primarily affecting people of color, breached homes using military equipment under the assumption of a drug raid. Finally, by simply sporting excessive military equipment,

23 https://www.aclu.org/report/war-comes-home-excessive-militarization-american-police

16 DISEC PMUNC 2016 numerous situations are unnecessarily escalated. The United States has a significant and contemporary problem to address when it comes to police brutality, and reforms must take place at every level of government for an actual change to occur.

Country Blocs

The question of country blocs garners a distinct feature when discussing police brutality. The traditional lines among international allies have been muddled. Therefore, for the purpose of this special DISEC committee, the dais would not be surprised to see traditional “enemies” collaborating together. Of course, developing and developed nations share different goals and possess different incentives when it comes to policing. The important thing is that each delegation thoroughly researches their own countries in the hopes of finding out what policies have been implemented, which ones have not, and why not. Delegates are encouraged to share those policies which have worked in their respective countries, with the promise of convincing others of the benefits of said policies.

Nevertheless, there will be topics that are naturally contentious: should the police force be militarized, what kind of weapons should they have access to, what are the minimum evidentiary thresholds to imprison someone, etc. These will be the discussions that will ultimately divide the room. So, as the dais will be reminding the delegates during the committee, make sure to listen to your fellow delegates to flesh out work groups more appropriately. And finally, with the aim of helping you all out with your research, the dais recommends going through known NGO databases, for they have produced many studies with solutions, solutions you may implement, to these problems (Amnesty International comes to mind for example). If you have any troubles with research, or simply any types of questions, feel free to email the dais at [email protected], as we get closer to the conference.

17 DISEC PMUNC 2016

Questions

 What is your country’s current legal framework regarding policing and lethal use of

force?

 What is the current state of police brutality in your country?

 Has your country taken steps to reduce corruption, police brutality? How? Are these

plans implementable somewhere else?

 How can officers report fellow officers without receiving any type of retribution?

 What role can citizens play in fair and effective policing?

 How can law enforcement officials effectively reach rural communities?

 Is your country’s police force militarized?

 Does your delegation have a history of pretrial detainment?

 How can a country work to eradicate racism/discrimination in its policing?

Key Terms

 Police brutality

 Arbitrary arrest and detention

 Minimum evidentiary threshold

 Militarization

18 DISEC PMUNC 2016

Topic B: The International Illegal Arms Trade

Introduction The trade of small and light weapons (SALW) is a relevant and pressing issue that the international community must address. While the recent 2013 Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) developed by the United Nations General Assembly is an achievement to celebrate, there is still much work to be done. On the international playing field, we have developing countries, such as African and Latin American nations, calling for stricter trade regulations, seeing as the trade of small and light weapons disproportionately affects them. On the other side of the arena, we have heavily developed or militarized nations obstructing the path to the development of a global regime that could effectively regulate SALW’s, such as Arabic countries and even the United States. Not only this, but the interests of non-state actors have to be also taken into consideration. As we will see, it was the academic community, alongside the adamant efforts of non-governmental organizations (NGO’s), that initially started the conversation regarding the negative effects of the small and light weapons trade.

Similarly, however, it has been big corporations that specialize on the manufacturing of said weapons that have aggressively lobbied governments to stray from any types of regulations.

Clearly, there are many sides, interests, and groups to manage all at once. That is why this committee topic promises to be a contentious one, and will require compromise and constant negotiations between opposing groups. The product of this debate, a strong and comprehensive Resolution, will therefore reflect the numerous small battles and discussions that took place in order to develop a thorough solution.

Historical Background As previously mentioned, the 2013 Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) was just recently signed. And while surely a victory, it has all sorts of limitations. In order to fully understand

19 DISEC PMUNC 2016 these shortcomings, it is first necessary to go into a brief history of the trade of small and light weapons (SALW) and the relevant regional and international legislation that has emerged throughout the past three decades.

The history of regulations surrounding small and light weapons is a relatively short, but important one. During the Cold War era, the international community was focused on ensuring that weapons of mass destruction (WMD’s) were not further developed. In fact, it was the DISEC body that drafted the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that marked the first step towards the curtailment of this type of weapons. In that geopolitical context, it was more important to deal with the imminent threat of mass destruction than to deal with the legal and illicit trade of small and light weapons. Contrary to what happened with weapons of mass destruction, there was never an organized global effort during the Cold War that sought to minimize the proliferation of small and light weapons. This is due to the fact that

SALW’s were considered second-class weapons since they posed no immediate threat to the

State. However, this aversion to deal with SALW’s created the perfect environment for the massive proliferation of these weapons to take place. It is within this context that an international market of small and light weapons emerged. This market was fueled by transactions between the two global powers, the United States and the former Soviet Union, to third world countries, in regions that were considered strategic spheres of influence. 24 For example, during this era, the relationship between the United States and Latin America can be categorized as vertical; the United States repeatedly intervened in the southern American continent, supporting anti-communist regimes and supplying great quantities of small weapons. The United States’ intervention exacerbated much of the conflicts between the different powers of the sub-continent. It is no surprise then that both a legal and illegal arms

24 Efrat, Asif. "Toward Internationally Regulated Goods: Controlling The Trade In Small Arms And Light Weapons". International Organization 64.1 (2010): 97-131. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.

20 DISEC PMUNC 2016 trade of significant size emerged in Latin America, especially in the regions of Central

America and the Caribbean.

With the fall of the Soviet bloc and the beginning of a unipolar international order, competition for different zones of influence and ideological battles became unnecessary.

Direct military intervention dwindled – capitalism, the free market, and liberalism had won over communism. However, that is not to say that the arms trade market also perished. In fact, with the surplus of arms accumulated by the world powers, and the high demand for these weapons in developing countries with interior conflicts and organized crime groups, the market continued to operate. 25 Like a domino effect, the lack of international regulation concerning SALW created an unprecedented access to these types of weapons, shortly after allowing civil society to get hold of them. Following the end of the Cold War, the world found a new way to express violence, which coincided with a diminution of war as an instrument of political power, and the rise of homicides and assassinations on a global scale.

This is how SAWL’s eventually became a real security concern for various countries. It was these same countries, alongside the academic community and different NGO’s, that would later on bring this to the attention of the international community.

In 1995, Mali directly requested the help of the General Assembly in order to round up small arms and intervene to stop the illegal trade of these. As a response, the then

Secretary General was able to introduce the topic to the General Assembly. If anything, this showcases that it was the African region that was primarily able to mobilize these afflicted communities. Alongside these efforts, in 1996 Nobel Prize winner and former president of

Costa Rica, Oscar Arias, called upon several academics and leaders to develop an

25 Paper by the Commonwealth Secretari,. "PROLIFERATION OF SMALL ARMS AND LIGHT WEAPONS: WORKING TOWARDS AN ARMS TRADE TREATY". Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education 6.2 (2008): 187-208. Web.

21 DISEC PMUNC 2016

International Code of Conduct for SALW’s. While this document was heavily criticized by several nations, such as Pakistan, Egypt, and Colombia, it nevertheless gained much attention and traction. And, in 2001, it was formalized into international law under the

Programme of Action (PoA). While many criticized the PoA for its lack of enforcement mechanisms and its non-binding nature, it still serves as an example for how small nations and actors can intervene internationally.

Current Situation Before engaging in the contemporary situation that characterizes the state of the legal and illicit trade of SALW’s, two things are needed: 1) a definition of small and light weapons, and 2) a discussion of the problems associated with SALW’s. A condition for a weapon to either be “small” or “light” is the fact that it must be able to be carried by an individual, a small number of people, or transported by pack of animals or a light vehicle. In other words, there is an inherent portability characteristic to small and light arms. More specifically however, small arms include: “revolvers and self-loading pistols, rifles and carbines, assault rifles, sub-machine guns and light machine guns”26. Light weapons are composed by, but not limited to: heavy machine guns, hand-held, under-barrel and mounted grenade launchers, portable anti-aircraft guns, portable launchers of anti-tank missile and rocket systems, portable launchers of anti-aircraft missile systems (MANPADS), and mortars of caliber less than 100.27 For the purposes of the committee, naming these explicitly should not be the aim. However, if the delegates feel, given their country’s policy, that some items should be included or removed, from this short list, then by all means make a point of it. Additionally, a proper definition, either based on past UN resolutions or on original ideas, is requested for

26 "Small Arms Survey - Small Arms". Smallarmssurvey.org. N.p., 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016. 27 Ibid.

22 DISEC PMUNC 2016 every working paper. The aim, in the end, is to be able to distinguish between SALW’s and conventional weapons of war.

Now that we have properly defined these weapons, let us address the key issues that are of particular concern. According to the United Nations Office on Drug and Crimes

(UNODC), at least 41% of homicides committed worldwide are executed with small arms. 28

And, as previously discussed, it disproportionately affects smaller or developing countries, in line with the following the distribution: Latin America (66%), Africa (28%), Asia (28%),

Europe (13%), and Oceania (10%). Undoubtedly, the illicit flow of small arms and light weapons undermines human security and the rule of law. The High Commissioner for

Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad al Hussein argues that not only do small arms make the killing of peoples easier, but they also destroy economies and the social bonds on which every society is founded on. The negative externalities associated with the excessive proliferation of

SALW’s are boundless, and can include issues such as the denial of health and education, criminality, decreased trade and investments, violence against women and girls, the plundering of human resources, and the collapse of rule of law.29 Examples of these types of abuses vary – for example, president of the Cote d’Ivoire chapter of West Africa Action

Network on Small Arms has shared his experience in the past when terror flooded the streets an electoral dispute led to the anarchic distribution of small arms and ammunition by some contentious political leaders. These weapons, argued Karamoko Diakité, had entered the country illegally, defying an embargo on arms that was in place. Similarly, following the demise of Muammar Qadhafi, small arms had been flooding into Lybia. The same holds for

28 Nunes, Everardo Duarte. "United Nations Office On Drugs And Crime (UNODC). Global Study On Homicide: Trends, Context, Data. Vienna: UNODC; 2013". Ciênc. saúde coletiva 17.12 (2012): 3447-3449. Web. 29 Ibid.

23 DISEC PMUNC 2016 countries like Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Chad and Cameroon non-state actor,.30 On the other side of the world, we have witnessed how the FARC’s access to small arms, a non-state actor, has plagued the Colombian people for centuries up until recently. In Nicaragua, the steady inflow of U.S. manufactured weapons also stirred much internal instability. And finally, the

Middle East is no stranger to both the legal and illicit presence of small and light weapons, as countries like Syria immediately come to mind. With all these conflicts, it is not surprising that there are over 875 million SALWs in the world, and let us not forget they are the weapons principally employed in wars and banditry31. With this context, the Programme of

Action clearly needed updates.

A decade and a half later, we saw the ratification of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) by the General Assembly of the U.N., a sort of continuation to the Programme of Action.

However, between the enactment of the PoA and the introduction of the ATT, much has happened, and the attention the academic and international community once gave to the issue has diminished. In short, specificity, which was much more abundant in the PoA, is no longer a reality in the Arms Trade Treaty. If we review the history and the process ratification for the ATT, we see that small and light weapons were delegated to secondary field, below that of conventional weapons. Additionally, there was great opposition to the

ATT led by Arab countries and those countries which are themselves producers of SALW’s, these latter ones being the ones most vehemently opposed to the imposition of regulations.

32 This noticeable opposition to the ATT led to a document with several large craters in it that pose a substantive danger to those countries already plagued by internal strife. Finally,

30 "Human Cost Of Illicit Flow Of Small Arms, Light Weapons Stressed In Security Council Debate". United Nations. N.p., 2016. Web. 13 Sept. 2016. 31 Ibid. 32 Efrat, Asif. "Toward Internationally Regulated Goods: Controlling The Trade In Small Arms And Light Weapons". International Organization 64.1 (2010): 97-131. Web. 13 Sept. 2016.

24 DISEC PMUNC 2016 several countries have argued that international policies that look for the regulation of small and light weapons are but another attempt to reestablish imperial relationships between developed and developing nations, for they believe these regulations would allow the further concentration of weapons in the world powers, while keeping smaller nations at the margins of this progress. In the past, this has been the official stance of countries such as Venezuela,

Ecuador, and Honduras33.

In other words, the result of the debate surrounding the drafting of the ATT is that a lot of the provisions that were considered mandatory in the past under the PoA, are now of discretionary nature, left to the whim of every signing member nation. Specifically, the ATT is severely weakened in the following areas: export registry, brokering, labeling/cataloguing, exchange of information, management of reserve excess stockpiles, and transparency34.

Under this new document, much is in the de facto in the hands of civil society, especially in those countries that lack a strong central government. It is worth mentioning that

“…perhaps most significantly the PoA provided for a regular follow-up process, including periodic review conferences as well as biennial meetings of participating states”35.

The Arms Trade Treaty, while it clearly focuses on conventional weapons, lacks strong provisions concerning SALW. The problem at hand, then, is developing a document that clearly, and strictly focuses on small and light weapons. This document should include provisions for both the exporters and importers of weapons, respecting the sovereignty of each nation. There are solutions to this subject matter. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has stated that “guns can be licensed, marked or confiscated; ammunition can be tracked,

33 Ibid. 34 Paper by the Commonwealth Secretari,. "PROLIFERATION OF SMALL ARMS AND LIGHT WEAPONS: WORKING TOWARDS AN ARMS TRADE TREATY". Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education 6.2 (2008): 187-208. Web. 35 Ibid.

25 DISEC PMUNC 2016 removed or destroyed; and depots can be guarded, cleared or secured”36. The problem, a contentious one that will arise during debate, is convincing players from opposite sides of the aisles to compromise. The document should also address concerns over the differences between legitimate and illicit trade of arms, something that will be of particular interest to developed nations – for these nations will want to protect their right to the manufacture and sale of weapons.

Country Blocs The country blocs in this committee will follow the traditional developed vs. developing nation lines, granted some exceptions. For example, a country like Venezuela, a developing nation in Latin America, will be hesitant to place international guidelines, for they fear that other countries, such as the United States, will continue to amass too much power.

A compromise will have to be reached in which the sovereignty of each nation is assured. In the end, there are producers, consumers, countries greatly affected by the sale of small arms, and those who profit from this sale. Crafting this document will be no small feat, and the dais is extremely excited to see the delegates bring their best game. We advise that delegates look into the voting records of their particular delegation to see how their stance on the particular issue. Before voting, countries usually emit a message explaining their position. If there any doubts as we approach the committee weekend, feel free to shoot an email to the dais at [email protected].

Questions  Has your delegation been the victim of illicit, or legal, trade of SALW?

 Is your country typically considered a producer in SALW?

 What is your delegation’s voting record on the subject matter?

36 Ibid.

26 DISEC PMUNC 2016

 What domestic policies has your nation employed to curtail violence related

to SAWL?

 Is your delegation part of a regional body that has existing legislation on

SALW?

 What will be the biggest impediment for you nation to foresee the

implementation of any type of SALW regulations?

Key Terms  Small and light weapons (SAWL)

 The Arms Trade Treaty

 Programme of Action (PoA)

 Legal vs. illicit trade of arms

27