Search

Begin New Search Topic Arms Trade Political Geography Global Focus

1. Prohibitions and Export Assessment: Tracking Implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty

Author:
Tobias Vestner
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
This Geneva Paper shows that ATT states parties generally implement the ATT’s prohibitions set forth in Article 6 through national laws and policies. This paper also demonstrates that exporting states implement the ATT’s obligations regarding export assessment contained in Article 7 in many different ways. While the spectrum of how exporting states parties consider an arms exports’ potential effect on peace and security is very broad, their national frameworks contain similar or nearly identical export criteria on assessing the risk of arms being used for serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Few states parties have national export criteria regarding terrorism, transnational organized crime and gender-based violence. States also consider national criteria other than those specified in Article 7 before authorizing arms exports, including positive consequences of arms exports. Finally, states parties’ national frameworks mostly do not define clear thresholds for denying arms exports. Given this divergence in states party implementation, in addition to a remaining lack of clarity on how states apply the ATT provisions in practice, this paper recommends reinforcing dialogue on ATT implementation. This could lead to better understanding and implementation guidance that strengthens the emergence of common standards and improves the quality of national export assessments. To increase states parties’ knowledge on risks to be avoided, institutionalizing cooperation with human rights bodies and establishing an ATT internal information exchange mechanism is also recommended.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Treaties and Agreements, United Nations, and Arms Trade
Political Geography:
United Nations and Global Focus

2. Synergies between the Arms Trade Treaty and the Wassenaar Arrangement

Author:
Tobias Vestner
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The Arms Trade Treaty and the Wassenaar Arrangement both seek to address the challenge posed by unconstrained transfer of conventional arms but differ in structure and approach. There are opportunities for synergies furthering the regimes’ common purpose. States members to both regimes can accentuate and interweave the strengths of the Arms Trade Treaty and the Wassenaar Arrangement. Transferring cutting-edge standards on export controls from the Wassenaar Arrangement to the Arms Trade Treaty would bolster the Arms Trade Treaty and foster global harmonization between exporting and importing countries. Political momentum on certain issues within the Arms Trade Treaty process may benefit the Wassenaar Arrangement’s further development. A derivative of the Wassenaar Arrangement’s regular ‘General Information Exchange’ on regions, transfers, and risky actors could be institutionalized within an Arms Trade Treaty working group. Sharing within the Wassenaar Arrangement information, concerns and practical challenges of states parties to the Arms Trade Treaty could make the Wassenaar Arrangement’s work more effective. Coordinating both regimes’ outreach activities, mentioning each other’s work and using each other’s documents for capacity building could mainstream arms transfer controls, prevent perceptions of conflicting standards as well as enable efficiencies regarding national efforts for compliance with international standards.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Treaties and Agreements, Arms Trade, and Exports
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Bio Plus X: Arms Control and the Convergence of Biology and Emerging Technologies

Author:
Kolja Brockmann, Sibylle Bauer, and Dr Vincent Boulanin
Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
Technological advances in the biological sciences have long presented a challenge to efforts to maintain biosecurity and prevent the proliferation of biological weapons. The convergence of developments in biotechnology with other, emerging technologies such as additive manufacturing, artificial intelligence and robotics has increased the possibilities for the development and use of biological weapons. This report, written by SIPRI experts on technology and arms control, provides a nuanced picture of the risks and challenges posed by this convergence. It analyses the extent to which concerns arising from new technological developments can be dealt with through existing governance mechanisms. Based on the limitations identified, the authors recommend the action that needs to be taken by national governments, international organizations, academia, the private sector and the DIY community.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Military Affairs, Arms Trade, Biological Weapons, and Chemical Weapons
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. The 2018 Small Arms Trade Transparency Barometer

Author:
Paul Holtom and Irene Pavesi
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Small Arms Survey
Abstract:
The 2018 Small Arms Trade Transparency Barometer (the Barometer) identifies the most and least transparent of 49 major small arms exporters, based on their reporting of their arms-trading activities undertaken in 2015.1 For the first time the Barometer assesses Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and UN Programme of Action on small arms (PoA) reports to determine small arms exporters’ levels of transparency. These sources provide new information for the Barometer’s assessment of national transfer control systems, while ATT annual reports on arms exports reveal new data compared to national arms export reports; United Nations Commodity Trade Statistics Database (UN Comtrade) data, and the UN Register of Conventional Arms (UN Register). Despite the increase in reports containing information on national transfer control systems and small arms exports assessed by the Barometer, no major exporter received full marks for transparency.
Topic:
International Security, International Affairs, and Arms Trade
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. The Art of the Deal, the AK-47 and the Arms Trade Treaty

Author:
Simon Adams
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
When we think of the Holocaust our mind slips inexorably to dismal images of cattle cars stuffed with people, or to gas chambers, crematoria and the cruel irony of the “Arbeit Macht Frei” gate. But of the six million Jews killed during the Holocaust over a million were shot with rifles and other small arms. They were not killed in concentration camps, but were murdered in fields or forests and pitched into mass graves outside villages in Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe. Before Auschwitz, Sobibor or Treblinka, the Holocaust began with bullets. The same is true of most mass atrocities carried out since 1945. From the killing fields of Cambodia to the burnt villages of Darfur, most of the killing was done with rifles and other small arms. It is for this reason that there is an enduring connection between preventing atrocities and confronting the international arms trade. The AK-47, or Kalashnikov, is the most popular weapon in the world today, with an estimated 70 million currently in existence. Numerous countries manufacture local variants of the ubiquitous assault rifle and while a new Chinese-made AK-47 might cost you $500, you can easily purchase one in many former conflict zones for as cheap as $50. When I lived in Johannesburg during the mid-1990s, leftover AK-47s from the civil war in Mozambique were still making their way through the townships and some entrepreneurial gangs were even renting out their AK-47s to other aspiring criminals at an hourly rate.
Topic:
Violent Extremism, Weapons, Arms Trade, and Responsibility to Protect (R2P)
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, United Nations, and Global Focus

6. Transfers and Transparency

Author:
Irene Pavesi
Publication Date:
05-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Small Arms Survey
Abstract:
This Update provides an overview of the international trade in small arms and light weapons in 2013. The first section of the Update reports on the total values and main categories of small arms1 transferred by top and major exporters and importers. This section also assesses changes in trade patterns from 2012 to 2013. The second section presents the 2016 edition of the Small Arms Trade Transparency Barometer, whose methodology and sourcing have been revised. As explained below, the Barometer now includes a new source—the Regional Report on Arms Exports, prepared by of the South Eastern and Eastern Europe Clearinghouse for the Control of Small Arms (SEESAC).
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Military Strategy, Military Affairs, Weapons, and Arms Trade
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. A Guide to the Small Arms Process

Author:
Sarah Parker and Marcus Wilson
Publication Date:
05-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Small Arms Survey
Abstract:
UN member states adopted the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime in November 2000.3 UNTOC was supplemented by three protocols that address trafficking in persons, the smuggling of migrants, and the illicit manufacture of and trafficking in firearms. The third of these—the UN Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Their Parts and Components and Ammunition, known as the Firearms Protocol—was adopted on 31 May 2001 by General Assembly Resolution 55/255 and entered into force on 3 July 2005 (UNGA, 2001c). For states that have ratified or otherwise formally expressed their consent to be bound by it, the Firearms Protocol is legally binding.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, United Nations, Weapons, and Arms Trade
Political Geography:
Global Focus

8. Arms Trafficking: The International and Domestic Legal Framework

Author:
Oona A. Hathaway, Elizabeth Nielsen, Chelsea Purvis, Saurrabh Sanghvi, and Sara Solow
Publication Date:
11-2011
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Legal Challenges, Yale Law School
Abstract:
The conventional arms trade,2 both legal and illegal, is vast in scope. As of 2001, there were an estimated half billion documented small arms in the world, more than one for every twelve people.3 International arms sales are a booming business, and the United States is the world’s largest exporter. In 2008, worldwide arms transfer agreements reached a value of $55.2 billion, of which 76.4% involved developing nations.4 The United States accounted for $37.8 billion, or 68.4%, of these worldwide arms transfer agreements,5 and U.S. activity falls into five categories: foreign military sales agreements between foreign governments and the Department of Defense, direct commercial sales to foreign buyers negotiated by U.S. companies, leases of military equipment by U.S. entities, excess defense materials, and emergency decreases of weapons stockpiles.6 An extensive legal regime has emerged at the international and domestic levels to regulate conventional arms trafficking. This report aims to provide an overview of that framework. It surveys existing international arms trafficking agreements and provides an analytic framework for distinguishing between them. It also surveys the domestic legal framework regarding arms trafficking. Together, these overviews provide a starting point for identifying the shortcomings of existing law, identifying gaps in the legal framework as it currently operates, and considering options to begin to address these shortcomings. This report begins in Part I by briefly outlining the scope of the problem of conventional arms trafficking. It then turns in Part II to identifying three fundamental axes on which international arms trafficking agreements differ. First, each agreement targets one or more points in a conventional arms life cycle: it targets the point of production; the point of domestic ownership and transfer; or the point of interstate transfer. Second, agreements differ in the scope of weapons they cover—they may target different classes of weapons (such as major conventional weapons, small arms and light weapons, and dual-use technologies) and different legal categories of weapons (for example, some cover both legal and illicit weapons, while others only focus on illicit weapons). Third, agreements differ in terms of their enforceability: some are legally binding while others set nonbinding goals. Part III of the report examines the ways in which the United States regulates arms trafficking through its domestic laws and international agreements. It shows that the United States places strong controls on interstate transfers of arms, but it has a more mixed record when it comes to regulating earlier stages of the arms life cycle. While U.S. law places a number of marking and recordkeeping requirements on arms producers and sellers, domestic ownership laws are lax compared to those of other countries. Part IV shows that there are three major gaps in extant arms trafficking agreements. First, the international agreements that are the most enforceable either fail to target arms trafficking at multiple points in the life cycle or fail to cover a broad scope of weapons. Second, arms trafficking agreements do not adequately regulate the illicit resale of arms in the black market after they are produced and sold for the first time legally. This is because there is no binding and enforceable agreement that requires states to track all domestic weapons transfers, from their initial sale to the final sale before their export. Finally, major arms suppliers, such as the United States, are not party to several major arms trafficking agreements. To address these shortcomings, this report offers three options available to U.S. policymakers for strengthening arms trafficking laws. First, the United States could increase multilateral engagement by ratifying the leading regional arms trafficking agreement, Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunitions, Explosives, and Other Related Materials (CIFTA). Doing so would likely require no changes in U.S. domestic law but would strengthen the U.S. ability to coordinate its arms control efforts with other countries while encouraging other countries to more effectively address arms trafficking. Second, the United States could increase bilateral programmatic assistance to address arms trafficking—at the very least by taking arms trafficking into account in existing assistance programs. Finally, the United States could engage more actively in leading negotiations over a robust and comprehensive arms trade treaty. Such an agreement would ideally aim to bring the international legal standards developed in CIFTA to the global stage. In leading the way toward such a comprehensive treaty, the United States could encourage universal adoption of the high standards the United States already has in place to ensure that arms are not transferred for illegitimate purposes—purposes that may directly affect U.S. security interests.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Arms Trade, Trafficking, Legal Theory, and Illegal Trade
Political Geography:
Global Focus