US Obstructionism in the World Struggle Against Small Arms and Light Weapons

In a Global Day of Action on September 13, campaigners in 42 countries organized activities aimed at putting pressure on their governments to support the Arms Trade Treaty resolution at the UN this coming October. The key message to these governments was

The 2006 Small Arms Review Conference opened on June 26, attended by 164 countries, marking the fifth year of efforts to implement the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat, and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects. It closed on Friday, July 7, proclaimed a failure, a missed opportunity. All that the Secretary General could salvage from the debacle was a vague hope that “the Conference did succeed in recalling the issue of small arms and light weapons to the attention of the international community.”

The result was not entirely unexpected. The opening morning of the conference was marked by a protest in the Dag Hammarskjold Plaza. Standing in the rain were a few men handing out brochures advocating the right to own, carry, and use guns. They represented a constituency that did not believe the Review Conference’s emphasis on the “illegal trade” in weapons would stop with limiting only illegal trade. They believe the true — and hidden — goal of the Programme of Action is to eliminate everyone’s right to bear arms. While their numbers outside the conference were small, these protesters were in fact well represented inside the UN by some countries and some NGOs that warned against the “slippery slope” leading to total gun confiscation.

Kofi Annan opened the Conference with a denial, reiterating that the conference was not advocating a global ban on gun ownership. “Nor do we wish to deny law-abiding citizens their right to bear arms in accordance with their national laws,” he said. A global ban on weapons, even on the transfer of weapons to so-called non-state actors, was nowhere on the agenda. Nonetheless, the ‘rights of gun owners’ was a subtext of the conference. Fifteen of thirty Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs), when given the opportunity to address the General Session of the conference on the fifth day, chose to proclaim the rights of gun owners and gun and ammunition manufacturers. Mr. Hermann Suter, “speaking for the lawful firearms-owners of Switzerland” invoked the spirit of William Tell as he argued against pressuring non-compliant States to participate in implementing the Programme of Action. He disagreed that the first step in fighting poverty in fragile and at-risk countries was to “register, prohibit, cease production of and to destroy small and light weapons wherever they are found.” Finding no irony in the comparison, he insisted that the reason Switzerland escaped Nazi plundering and survived that “terrible time in history” was due to Swiss civilian armaments.

The US delegate, Robert G. Joseph, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, presented the US position on the second afternoon of the conference. While appearing to affirm the idea of implementation, he also affirmed the right of private gun ownership in passionate and Constitutional terms. And he established firmly that the US believed that “regulating ammunition is beyond the mandate of this body and would be ineffective, prohibitively costly …and while the US will of course continue to oppose the acquisition of arms by terrorist groups, we recognize the rights of the oppressed to defend themselves against tyrannical and genocidal regimes and oppose a blanket ban on non-state actors.”

To the surprise of all, the US included representatives of three NGOs on the official delegation to the conference. To the surprise of no one, all three citizen delegates “were prominent members of the gun lobby group” (New York Times, 6/28/06).

Small Arms, Deadly Effects

Why focus on small arms and light-weapons? In 2005, small arms alone were responsible for the deaths of over half a million people — 10,000 per week. In every country, civilians are affected by gun violence — whether in domestic violence situations, armed robberies, or power struggles of any description, small arms increase fatalities dramatically. And in countries involved in or recently involved in civil war, the impact of small arms has been devastating. Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf became the President of Liberia in the “wake of a devastating civil war that took untold numbers of lives and laid the economy to waste.” While Liberia is beginning to return to a semblance of stability, Johnson-Sirleaf is concerned that “after 14 years of armed conflict, and despite important weapons reduction efforts, Liberia remains awash with small arms.”

The goal of the Review Conference, only the second in the history of the United Nations on small arms, was to create a plan for implementation of the Programme of Action, agreed upon and adopted in 2001. According to the Secretary General,

“Nearly 140 countries have reported on their implementation of the Programme. An overwhelming majority of them have laws to restrict the flow of illicit small arms and light weapons, and well over half have established national coordinating bodies to check their spread. In addition, a third of all States have made efforts to collect the weapons from those not legally entitled to hold them. And a majority have implemented standards and procedures to secure and manage weapon stockpiles.”

This is an impressive policy accomplishment for an agreement reached before the traumatic events of September 11, 2001. The ensuing five years, however, have seen repeated destruction by small arms and light weapons, and, as Johnson-Sirleaf suggests, some very limited progress in restricting access to these weapons or in destroying the stockpiles left at the end of in-country violence. Small arms have been used against governments and civilians by government forces, by non-state actors, by terrorists in the name of nationalism or religion, by cartels or gangs running drugs and weapons, and by random thugs and thieves. The policy agreement embodied in the Programme of Action could certainly have used some guidelines for implementation, some mutually agreed upon standards for guaranteeing that weapons sales and transfers meet international standards, some model laws and regulations for states to adopt with regard to licensing brokers, and more. What should have been an opportunity to negotiate agreements like end-user certificates and verification measures became instead a performance by gun owner lobby groups, to the detriment of countries most affected by the illegal use and spread of small arms and light weapons.

Supply and Demand

Although the Programme of Action makes one reference to the concept of demand in the Preamble, stressing the “urgency of international efforts and cooperation aimed at combating this trade simultaneously from both a supply and demand perspective,” the primary emphasis is on controlling the supply of small arms. Just as the focus is on supply when the US is fighting the “war on drugs,” so too the route to reducing the use of small arms has been perceived to be cutting off the source rather than dealing with the demand.

What is gained by including the concept of demand for weapons when the traditional methods of control are through limiting arms transfers, eliminating post-conflict arms stockpiles, and verifying the legitimacy of buyer and seller, among others? Although there are many benefits, three stand out:

• Redefining human security — Increasingly, development processes are being seen as a part of a wider conflict prevention system. The UN High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change recently stated: “Development has to be the first line of defense for a collective security system that takes prevention seriously. Combating poverty will not only save millions of lives but also strengthen states’ capacity to combat terrorism, organized crime, and weapons proliferation.”

• Addressing the gendered socialization of weaponry — The vast majority of research confirms that the connection between masculinity and guns is the result of socialization into violent expressions of manhood. While boys and men commit most acts of violence with small weapons, they — not women — also account for the overwhelming majority of firearm-related deaths and injuries. Research is needed, however, into the resiliency of young men and boys, the majority of whom resist or decide against armed violence, to determine what makes some choose not to participate.

• Allowing for the growth of alternative methods of resolving conflict — On the first day of the Review Conference, the delegate from Papua New Guinea announced that his country had recently hosted a Regional Workshop on Gender, Conflict, Peace and Security which called for a range of follow-up actions to accelerate implementation of UNSC Resolution 1325 in the Pacific region. For this country, the inclusion of women in conflict resolution was crucial, as it should be for every country. In addition, considering alternatives to the demand for weapons to resolve conflicts allows for the exploration of community methods of conflict management through collaboration with traditional leaders and structures as well as with formal government security structures.

A Commitment to Move Forward

It is rare for those affected by gun violence to be able to make their voices heard. During the NGO session, when fifteen organizations spoke against limiting their right to manufacture or possess weapons the International Action Network on Small Arms presented another fifteen speakers, many of whom were survivors of gun violence. And as the Review Conference closed, several state representatives asserted that the victims of their mutual failure to further implement the Programme of Action would be the “millions of people around the world dying daily from small arms violence.”

Some states said they would continue to pursue the matter of small arms limitations in the General Assembly. If “push comes to shove,” said Sierra Leone’s speaker, the issues debated at the Review Conference would be voted upon in spite of the obstructions. “We shall not depend on this concept of consensus, which, in my view, has been used as a weapon to destroy the work that we have done, the work that you have done, and all that we have put in,” he said.

Individuals and groups can support the following activities in an effort to reduce the deaths and violence that small arms and light weapons cause:

• Support efforts by governments to make progress on combating the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons during the General Assembly’s First Committee meeting on Peace and International Security this fall, where up and down voting, rather than consensus, is the decision-making process.

• Encourage the UN Peacebuilding Commission to focus on weapons control and Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) of ex-combatants as part of its multi-faceted framework.

• Urge countries to provide incentives (tax breaks, subsidies) for the conversion of gun- and weapons-producing industries into the production of products for civilian use in order to reduce the global supply of small arms.

• Continue to support the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security in order to increase the role of women in conflict prevention and resolution..

• Continue to support efforts in Nigeria and elsewhere to recruit youth into “Peace Volunteer” programs where they are trained in conflict prevention techniques.

The 2006 Review Conference on Small Arms was indeed a disappointment. However, efforts by NGOs and committed governments will continue. And as individuals and communities, we can get involved, stay engaged, and pressure our governments to participate fully in this process.

In a Global Day of Action on September 13, campaigners in 42 countries organized activities aimed at putting pressure on their governments to support the Arms Trade Treaty resolution at the UN this coming October. The key message to these governments was the need for the resolution to be strengthened to include references to international humanitarian law, human rights, and sustainable development. The Global Day of Action built upon the previous 100 Days of Action of Oxfam’s Control Arms Campaign, and even more campaigning and lobbying activities are planned in the lead up to the UN General Assembly. To learn more and get involved, visit www.controlarms.org