DOCSLIB.ORG

Ploughshares Monitor SUMMER 2013 | VOLUME 34 | ISSUE 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ploughshares Monitor SUMMER 2013 | VOLUME 34 | ISSUE 2 ATT Timeline Global stunts Canada and the ATT Resilience Highlights from Campaigners get creative What should Ottawa do A new antidote 1997 to 2013 to draw attention to meet terms of treaty? for human insecurity The Ploughshares Monitor SUMMER 2013 | VOLUME 34 | ISSUE 2 Arms Trade Treaty adopted TheA quarterlyPloughshares publication Monitor | of Project Ploughshares • Available online: www.ploughshares.ca 1 Contents The Ploughshares Monitor Volume 34 | Issue 2 PROJECT PLOUGHSHARES STAFF Summer 2013 John siebert Executive Director Kenneth Epps Brockenshire Lemiski Debbie hughes Matthew Pupic Tasneem Jamal Wendy stocker Cesar Jaramillo Barbara Wagner A treaty for the 21st century 3 ATT: A significant triumph for containment from below. The Ploughshares Monitor is the quarterly by John Siebert journal of Project Ploughshares, the peace centre of The Canadian Council of Churches. Ploughshares works with churches, nongovernmental organizations, and governments, in Canada and abroad, to advance policies and actions that prevent war and armed violence and build peace. A tool to tackle armed violence Project Ploughshares is affiliated with 4 The ATT can reduce illegal arms transfers. the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, Conrad Grebel University College, University by Kenneth Epps of Waterloo. Office address: Project Ploughshares 57 Erb Street West ‘An incredible privilege’ Waterloo, Ontario N2L 6C2 Canada 519-888-6541, fax: 519-888-0018 8 A Q&A with Ploughshares’ Kenneth Epps. [email protected]; www.ploughshares.ca Project Ploughshares gratefully acknowledges the ongoing financial support of the many individuals, national churches and church agencies, local congregations, religious orders, and organizations across Canada that ensure TiMELinE: Arms Trade Treaty that the work of Project Ploughshares 12 continues. We are particularly grateful to The Simons Foundation in Vancouver Additions and amendments for its generous support. 14 Canada and the Arms Trade Treaty. All donors of $50 or more receive by Kenneth Epps a complimentary subscription to The Ploughshares Monitor. Annual subscription rates for libraries and institutions are: $30 in Canada; $30 (U.S.) in the United States; $35 (U.S.) internationally. Single copies are $5 plus shipping. hoTos Unless indicated otherwise, material may be P : shoot me with your camera reproduced freely, provided the author and 16 ATT campaigners around the world hold stunts. source are indicated and one copy is sent to Project Ploughshares. Return postage is guaranteed. Publications Mail Registration No. 40065122. Resilience ISSN 1499-321X. A powerful new antidote to security threats. The Ploughshares Monitor is indexed 20 in the Canadian Periodical Index. by Jessica West Photos of staff by Karl Griffiths-Fulton Printed at Waterloo Printing, Waterloo, Ontario. Printed with vegetable inks on paper with recycled content. We acknowledge the financial support CoVER: Soldiers of the Somali National Army walk at dusk under a rising crescent moon of the Government of Canada through the Canada Periodical Fund near the outskirts of Afgooye, a town west of Mogadishu in May 2012. Stuart Price/UN of the Department of Canadian Heritage. A treaty for the 21st century Arms Trade Treaty is another strand of international John siebert law to contain the forces of militarism and death ontainment was the name of sage of the Arms Trade Treaty at the liput who tried to tie down the giant the policy applied by the United Nations General Assembly. Gulliver, we send thin strands of in- CUnited States after 1946 to Once signed and ratified by 50 UN ternational law over the huge limbs its primary Cold War adversary, the member states, the ATT will become of military powers and arms produc- Soviet Union. The communist men- the first internationally recognized set ers to restrict their transactions, little ace could not be defeated head on by of rules for documenting, restricting, by little. By inspiring the develop- force of arms, but it could be con- and reducing the movement across ment of treaties on land mines tained on the global stage by con- borders of military goods. (1998) and cluster munitions (2010) fronting it where it sought to expand As the international Control Arms civil society played a vital role in its influence geographically, economi- coalition of civil society organiza- binding the limbs of giants. cally, or culturally. The aim of con- tions made clear in its ATT cam- The ATT is more expansive in its tainment was to prevent the paign, before this treaty bananas aspirations and scope than the mines expansion of this hostile influence. faced more global hurdles in crossing and clusters treaties. It will take years, The Cold War was a real war for international borders than tanks or possibly decades, before the ATT’s those who fought and died in count- automatic rifles. provisions are effectively imple- less proxy wars around the globe. Civil society proponents of the mented to prevent diversion of Containment of the Soviets was the ATT—alone or in concert—do not weapons into illegal channels and end West’s practical goal until it gave way have the power to set or enforce the military exports to human rights to détente and then rollback after the rules of the military arms transfer abusers and to active war zones. The Soviet Union collapsed on itself in game. Only states, acting collectively, Arms Trade Treaty is a treaty for the the late 1980s. can do this. rest of the 21st century. Much of the work of Project Fortunately, states have committed An extended period of implemen- Ploughshares on arms control, disar- themselves to an international order tation is no cause for discourage- mament, and non-proliferation of ruled by law and generally accepted ment. After all, the ATT took 20 weapons of mass destruction is an norms of behaviour through mem- years to emerge from protracted in- exercise in containment. Clearly not bership in the United Nations and ternational negotiations. the same as superpower containment, adherence to the UN Charter. Each Kenneth Epps and Project it is containment from below. By mo- of these—law, norms, UN, the UN Ploughshares have been working on bilizing public sentiment and assist- Charter—is imperfect in so many the ATT since 1997. We now begin a ing in the development of effective ways. But this formal acceptance of new act on treaty implementation in international laws, Ploughshares an international order with rules cre- the larger play about restricting mili- works with others in civil society ates the opening for Ploughshares tary transfers and instruments of war movements to contain the weapons and other civil society actors to work that plague humanity. that intensify devastating humanitar- with sympathetic states. Together we The ATT is not perfect, but there ian disasters in violent conflicts. can push for treaties that mutually will be opportunities to improve it. It On April 2 a tiny circle of our bind consenting states while contain- is another strand of international law staff in Waterloo raised glasses of ing or limiting some aspects of their to contain the forces of militarism bubbly with Senior Program Officer sovereign powers. and death—a significant triumph for Kenneth Epps to celebrate the pas- Like the tiny inhabitants of Lil- containment from below. The Ploughshares Monitor | Summer 2013 3 ABoVE: On June 3, delegates and ministers from around the world signed the historic Arms Trade Treaty at the United Nations. Signatures are added by rep- resentatives from the following countries: top row (left to right): Senegal, Iceland, Japan; second row: Mali, New Zealand, Republic of Korea; third row: Slovenia, St. Lucia, Sweden; fourth row: Switzerland, United Kingdom, Uruguay; fifth row: Czech Republic, France, Seychelles. Control Arms photos 4 The Ploughshares Monitor | Summer 2013 A tool to tackle armed violence Effective implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty will reduce illegal and irresponsible arms transfers By Kenneth Epps hen the UN Gen- Canada was one of 155 states that eral Assembly voted in favour of the treaty—four-fifths voted overwhelm- of all UN member states. Only three ingly in favour of states voted against: Iran, North Korea, the global Arms and Syria. Not coincidentally, all the Trade Treaty (ATT) on April 2 the roomW naysayers are subject to multilateral arms burst into loud applause, not least from embargoes. Although the remaining 22 the civil society representatives watching states abstained on the vote—including from the gallery. Civil society organiza- major arms exporters China and Russia tions such as Project Ploughshares had and major importers India and Saudi Ara- good reason to celebrate the treaty. More bia—there are expectations that over time than a decade of their coordinated efforts these states will join the treaty or at least around the globe had finally produced a adhere to global norms arising from it. meaningful result. Not only does the ne- The Arms Trade Treaty resulted from gotiated treaty have the support of the negotiations among UN member states, a vast majority of UN member states, but process that inevitably involved compro- also, as consistently called for by civil soci- mise. The product is not an ideal treaty. ety advocates, it can fulfill its humanitarian Nevertheless, the ATT can and should be purpose: to reduce human suffering. an important tool in worldwide efforts to It is widely acknowledged that civil so- reduce armed violence. Effective imple- ciety organizations sparked the treaty dis- mentation by states parties of treaty pro- cussions that began formally at the UN in visions will reduce and could eliminate the 2006. Civil society groups also maintained illegal and irresponsible arms transfers subsequent support and pressure to see that feed violence. the treaty delivered by the UN system. The strengths of the treaty outweigh its Many skeptics openly doubted that an ef- weaknesses, but the latter need to be ac- fective treaty could emerge from UN ne- knowledged and addressed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Nordic Countries and the European Security and Defence Policy
    13. The Nordic countries and conventional arms control: the case of small arms and light weapons Nicholas Marsh* I. Introduction and historical background During the cold war, Northern Europe was the scene of one of the continent’s largest and most asymmetric build-ups of conventional weaponry. The Soviet Union concentrated a significant part of its conventional strength—ground, air and naval forces—and also of its strategic nuclear capacity on the Kola Pen- insula and in the Leningrad Military District. Through its Warsaw Pact partners the Soviet Union controlled the southern shore of the Baltic Sea as well as the intra-German border. On the Western side, there was no direct match for this localized massing of power. If strategic balance was maintained, it was essen- tially by means of the overall capacity (especially nuclear and naval) of the USA and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization rather than by any credible counterweight in the Nordic region. As a result of special arrangements with NATO, the allied nations Denmark and Norway did not even have foreign forces or nuclear equipment stationed on their territory in peacetime. Finland and Sweden were neutral (or ‘non-aligned’) states with forces proportionate only to their own territorial needs. Moreover, of these four nations, only Sweden had a defence industry on an internationally competitive scale.1 Paradoxes of Nordic arms control and disarmament policy This was a situation in which the region’s responsible or vulnerable states might be expected to have had a keen interest in arms control and disarmament. Indeed, the Nordic states—and to a certain extent Poland—consistently sup- ported the cause of nuclear disarmament.2 They were among the foremost in encouraging steps and hosting events, such as the 1972–75 Helsinki negoti- ations on a conference on security and cooperation in Europe, designed to pro- mote inter-bloc cooperation and the lowering of military tensions in general.
    [Show full text]
  • Missing Pieces
    IPU HANDBOOK FOR PARLIAMENTARIANS No. 12 – 2007 MISSING PIECES MISSING A GUIDE FOR REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY ACTION A GUIDE FOR REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY MISSING PIECES A GUIDE FOR REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY ACTION HD CENTRE Centre for Centre for Humanitarian Inter-Parliamentary Union Humanitarian Inter-Parliamentary Union Dialogue Dialogue IPU HANDBOOK FOR PARLIAMENTARIANS No. 12 – 2007 MISSING PIECES MISSING A GUIDE FOR REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY ACTION A GUIDE FOR REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY MISSING PIECES A GUIDE FOR REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY ACTION HD CENTRE Centre for Centre for Humanitarian Inter-Parliamentary Union Humanitarian Inter-Parliamentary Union Dialogue Dialogue MISSING PIECES A GUIDE FOR REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY ACTION MISSING PIECES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This handbook was compiled by Cate Buchanan and Mireille Widmer from the Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue. Contributors to the original version are mentioned at the end of each theme. It was refined with inputs from the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and in particular its co- rapporteurs on small arms and light weapons, Mr. François-Xavier de Donnea (Belgium) and Ms. Ruth Oniang’o (Kenya), as well as members of the Bureau of the First Standing Committee on Peace and International Security. Additional comments were provided by Mr. Marc-Antoine Morel from the United Nations Development Programme, Ms. Julie E. Myers from the United Nations Children’s Fund,
    [Show full text]
  • Small Arms Transfer Control Measures and the Arms Trade Treaty
    A Project of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva Small Arms Transfer Control Measures and the Arms Trade Treaty A Small Arms Survey Review (2007–10) Small Arms Transfer Control Measures and the Arms Trade Treaty A Small Arms Survey Review (2007–10) About the Small Arms Survey The Small Arms Survey is an independent research project located at the Graduate Institute of International and Develop- ment Studies in Geneva, Switzerland. It serves as the principal source of public information on all aspects of small arms and armed violence and as a resource centre for governments, policy-makers, researchers, and activists. The project has an international staff with expertise in security studies, political science, law, economics, development studies, sociology, and criminology, and collaborates with a network of partners in more than 50 countries. Small Arms Survey Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies 47 Avenue Blanc 1202 Geneva Switzerland t +41 22 908 5777 f +41 22 732 2738 e [email protected] w www.smallarmssurvey.org Cover photograph: Alexandre Meneghini/AP Small Arms Transfer Control Measures and the Arms Trade Treaty A Small Arms Survey Review (2007–10) Back to Basics: Transfer Controls in Global Perspective (from Small Arms Survey 2007: Guns and the City, Chapter 4: pp. 116–43) .............................................................................................. 5 Arsenals Adrift: Arms and Ammunition Diversion (from Small Arms Survey 2008: Risk and Resilience, Chapter 2: pp. 41–75) ............................................................................................. 33 Who’s Buying? End-user Certification (from Small Arms Survey 2008: Risk and Resilience, Chapter 5: pp. 154–81) .......................................................................................... 67 Devils in Diversity: Export Controls for Military Small Arms (from Small Arms Survey 2009: Shadows of War, Chapter 2: pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Disarmament a Basic Guide
    Disarmament A Basic Guide by Melissa Gillis Third Edition United Nations, New York, 2012 Note THE UNITED NATIONS OFFICE FOR DISARMAMENT AFFAIRS has published the Ba- sic Guide pursuant to the purposes of the United Nations Disarmament Informa- tion Programme. The mandate of the Programme is to inform, educate and gener- ate public understanding of the importance of multilateral action, and support for it, in the field of arms limitation and disarmament. For more information, contact: Information and Outreach Branch United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs United Nations New York, NY 10017 Telephone: 212.963.3022 Email: [email protected] Website: www.un.org/disarmament THE FIRST EDITION of the Guide was originally written by Bhaskar Menon and pub- lished in 2001 in collaboration with the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Committee on Disarmament, Peace and Security. The second edition was authored and edited by Melissa Gillis, the editor of Disarmament Times, and was published in 2009. Ms. Gillis edited this third edition and provided updated text where ap- propriate. The Guide is intended for the general reader, but may also be useful for the disarmament educator or trainer. COVER DESIGN based on the United Nations poster entitled “The United Nations for a Better World”, designed by Ricardo Ernesto Jaime de Freitas. THE VIEWS expressed are those of the author/editor and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations. MATERIAL appearing in the Guide may be reprinted without permission, provided that credit is given to the author/editor and to the United Nations. Since 1972, the NGO COMMITTEE ON DISARMAMENT, PEACE AND SECURITY has provided services to citizens’ groups concerned with the peace and disarmament activities of the United Nations.
    [Show full text]
  • T Civil Society and Disarmament Civil Society and Disarm Iety and Disarmament Civil Society and Disarmament Civ Armament Civil S
    Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarma- ment Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and Civil Society and Disarmament disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and 2018disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarma- ment Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament CivilAdvocacy society by Non-governmental and disarmament Civil society and disarma- Organizations to Strengthen the ment Civil society and disarmament Civil societyUnited and disarmamentNations Programme Civil of Actionsociety and disarmament Civil on Small Arms and Light Weapons society and disarmament Civil society and disarmament Civil society and
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 10C. Towards an Arms Trade Treaty?
    Appendix 10C. Towards an arms trade treaty? PAUL HOLTOM and SIEMON T. WEZEMAN I. Introduction The most significant developments for conventional arms control in 2006 were the agreement reached in the United Nations General Assembly on the principle of a legally binding and universal arms trade treaty (ATT), and the establishment of a group of governmental experts to examine the issue. These achievements contrasted with the lack of progress at the review conference for the UN Programme of Action (POA) on small arms and light weapons (SALW).1 The issue of global guidelines for the control of conventional arms has been on the international agenda for a long time. In 1925 the League of Nations produced a draft Convention on the Arms Trade that was never adopted. Disarmament is an element of the UN Charter and the question of conventional arms control has been frequently discussed in the General Assembly’s annual deliberations on armaments. In contrast to chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, which are governed by global conven- tions prohibiting their transfer, there are no global conventions or treaties prohibiting or restricting transfers of conventional weapons.2 During the cold war the two blocs, and individual countries, used conventional weapon transfers with little restraint to establish or maintain spheres of influence. In the early to mid-1990s issues relating to conventional weapon proliferation began to attract more attention, and several sets of guidelines or principles on arms transfers were agreed by groups of countries, which included some of the largest arms exporters.3 In 1991 the UN Register of Conventional Arms (UNROCA) was estab- lished to promote transparency in the conventional arms trade.
    [Show full text]
  • Disarmament: a Basic Guide Aims to Provide a Useful Overview of the Nuanced Challenges of Building a More Peaceful World in the Twenty-First Century
    Office for Disarmament Affairs New York, 2017 Disarmament A Basic Guide Fourth Edition by Melissa Gillis asdf United Nations Note The United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs publishes the Basic Guide pursuant to the purposes of the United Nations Disarmament Information Programme. The mandate of the Programme is to inform, educate and generate public understanding of the importance of multilateral action, as well as support for it, in the field of arms limitation and disarmament. The Guide is intended for the general reader, but may also be useful for the disarmament educator or trainer. For more information, contact: Information and Outreach Branch United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs United Nations New York, NY 10017 Email: [email protected] Website: www.un.org/disarmament The cover is based on the United Nations poster entitled “The United Nations for a Better World”, designed by Ricardo Ernesto Jaime de Freitas. The views expressed are those of the author/editor and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations. Material appearing in the Guide may be reprinted without permission, provided that credit is given to the author/editor and to the United Nations. Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. These documents are available in the official languages of the United Nations at http://ods.un.org. Specific disarmament- related documents can also be accessed through the disarmament reference collection at www.un.org/disarmament/publications/library/. The Guide can be found online at www.un.org/disarmament/publications/ basic-guide/. UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana Model UN High School Conference General Assembly
    Montana Model UN High School Conference General Assembly First Committee Topic Background Guide Topic 2: Controlling the Arms Trade1 25 July 2014 Oxfam International is an international non-governmental organization based in the United Kingdom, whose mission is to promote development and human rights worldwide via humanitarian efforts including increasing public awareness of the causes of poverty and human rights like war.2 According to Oxfam, The irresponsible, excessive proliferation of arms and ammunition fuels and exacerbates conflict and armed violence. This is why arms control initiatives have major implications for the processes of socio-economic development. By implementing social and economic policies, as well as those relating to poverty reduction, development, security sector and arms control, governments can create the necessary environment to access essential services and enable people to make the choices and decisions that affect their daily lives. The poorly regulated trade in arms and ammunition weakens the ability and willingness of governments to create these enabling environments. Development gains are reversed as communities are paralysed; closing schools, placing immense strain on health systems, discouraging investment, and undermining security.3 Oxfam is not alone. Many development and human rights groups call attention to the direct costs in deaths and destruction caused by international and civil wars, as well as the indirect or “opportunity costs” caused by replacing economic and social programs with military
    [Show full text]
  • Iran, Syrian and DPRK Stall Adoption of Arms Trade Treaty
    Iran, Syrian and DPRK stall adoption of Arms Trade Treaty Campaigners expressed their ‘immense frustration’ with the consensus process after Syria, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea blocked agreement today of the Arms Trade Treaty. Despite a courageous last minute attempt by Mexico, Japan and several countries to save the process, the President of the Conference reached a conclusion that consensus could not be achieved. The Control Arms Coalition says the historic treaty is still within reach but that the consensus process had delayed proceedings again today when a handful of sceptical states used their veto power against the huge majority of states, who want to see the treaty pass. Kenya read a statement on behalf of 12 states, calling for the UN General Assembly to adopt the Treaty by vote as soon as possible. The earliest this can happen is 2 April, next Tuesday, when the President of the Conference, Ambassador Peter Woolcott, will be presenting his report. It is widely anticipated the treaty would then pass by majority enshrining in international law for the first time ever a set of rules to regulate the global arms trade. Anna Macdonald, Oxfam’s Head of Arms Control, said: “The world has been held hostage by three states. We have known all along that the consensus process was deeply flawed and today we see it is actually dysfunctional. Countries such as Iran, Syria and DPRK should not be allowed to dictate to the rest of the world how the sale of weapons should be regulated.
    [Show full text]
  • Japan's Proactive Multilateralism
    Masthead Logo Smith ScholarWorks Government: Faculty Publications Government 2017 Japan’s Proactive Multilateralism Dennis T. Yasutomo Smith College, [email protected] Tomoaki Ishigaki Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.smith.edu/gov_facpubs Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Yasutomo, Dennis T. and Ishigaki, Tomoaki, "Japan’s Proactive Multilateralism" (2017). Government: Faculty Publications, Smith College, Northampton, MA. https://scholarworks.smith.edu/gov_facpubs/9 This Article has been accepted for inclusion in Government: Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Smith ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected] DENNIS T. YASUTOMO AND TOMOAKI ISHIGAKI Japan’s Proactive Multilateralism The UN Arms Trade Treaty of 2013 ABSTRACT Japan’s 2013 UN Arms Trade Treaty diplomacy exhibited neither the standard minimalist, subservient negotiating style nor policymaking restricted to the usual actors. Juxtaposition of the treaty and the 2014 arms export policy revision illustrates how traditional ‘‘peace diplomacy’’ can evolve into ‘‘proactive pacifism.’’ KEYWORDS: Japan, UN, arms trade, diplomacy, negotiating style INTHEEARLY1990S,JAPAN EMBARKED on a decades-long multilateral dip- lomatic effort to monitor and regulate the transfer and use of conventional weapons. In 1991, Japan joined the European Community in proposing the establishment of an arms registration system, the UN Register of Conven- tional Arms (UNRCA). The creation of key international weapons frame- works followed, including the Ottawa Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention (1997), the Oslo Convention on Cluster Munitions (2008), and the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat, and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects (POA, 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • CONTROL ARMS Parliamentary Briefing
    1 CONTROL ARMS Parliamentary Briefing 2006 – a crucial year for controlling the global arms trade Introduction: In October 2003, Amnesty International, Oxfam and IANSA (the International Action Network on Small Arms) launched the Control Arms campaign in over 50 countries around the world. The campaign seeks to, amongst other things, build support among governments for an international Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), a legal instrument that would prohibit arms transfers to destinations where they are likely to be used to commit grave human rights violations or undermine development. Substantial progress has been made and at least 43 countries have declared their support for development of an ATT, including all EU member states. Notably the 52 countries of the Commonwealth present also made a supportive statement at the recent Commonwealth Heads of Government summit. Key points to note about the establishment of an ATT • 2006 is a crucial year for the campaign. There is currently no international process underway to establish an ATT but many governments, including the UK, have made a commitment to start discussions. The Control Arms campaign urge all governments to support the recommendation of the Commission for Africa report that “no later than 2006, the international community should open negotiations” for an ATT2. It is hoped that this negotiation will happen at the UN General Assembly in October. • In the UK the ATT has the support of the Defence Manufacturers Association and key trade unionists. The defence industry supports the ATT as it creates a level international playing field whereby defence companies are bound by the same rules.
    [Show full text]
  • Saferworld's Contribution to Achieving the Arms Trade Treaty
    0 LEARNING PAPER UN General Assembly approves global Arms Trade Treaty on 2 April 2013. Leading the applause, Acting President, the late Stuart Beck, Ambassador of Palau to the United Nations. © UN Photo/Devra Berkowitz Saferworld’s contribution to achieving the Arms Trade Treaty – 20 years of work has been working for since the 1990s, and the Introduction adoption of the Treaty is a major marker along the way to achieving the longer-term change This is an account of how a small organisation can Saferworld aspires to: to reduce violent conflict by achieve big results at the global policy level, using preventing the irresponsible international transfer limited financial and technical resources. of arms. On 2 April 2013 a large majority of states1 voted in In June 2013 the ATT opened for signature, with 67 favour of United Nations General Assembly states signing on the first day. Some 18 months Resolution A/RES/67/234B to adopt the Arms Trade later on 24 December 2014, with the 50th state Treaty (ATT). The agreement of a global ratification, the Treaty entered into force, and instrument like the ATT is a goal that Saferworld became international law. Since then 82 states have signed and ratified the Treaty, an unusually 1 UN resolution A/RES/67/234B was approved by a recorded vote of 154 fast process for such an instrument. in favour, 3 against, and 23 abstentions. Subsequent to the vote, the delegations of Angola and Cape Verde informed the United Nations The existence of an ATT in itself is a remarkable Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour, so the actual vote success for Saferworld and the coalition of non- was 156-3-22.
    [Show full text]