The Arms Trade Treaty

April 16, 2012

Click here to watch the ATT event hosted by Stimson.

In July 2012, States will negotiate a legally binding Arms Trade Treaty to develop the highest possible common international standards for the transfer of arms at the United Nations. Unlike many other weapon categories, the more than $40 billion annual market for conventional weapons trade is relatively unregulated globally. While a myriad of national laws and some regional agreements form a patchwork of regulations, there are no comprehensive common global standards for the conventional arms trade.  Over the last 30 years, piecemeal attempts have been made to this end; in particular, to close dangerous loopholes that have allowed arms to flow to human rights abusers and terrorists, perpetuate conflicts, and undermine development with impunity.

The actual text of the Treaty will not be negotiated until July. But, during preparatory meetings (Prepcoms) held in 2010, 2011, and February 2012, States discussed details of what types of things could or should be in an ATT. States focused on the potential elements of the treaty, the scope of the treaty, the criteria that States could use to determine whether to transfer arms, the national measures necessary to implement a treaty, and the types of assistance States might need to fulfill their obligations to the Treaty among many other topics.

The scope of the Treaty might include all conventional weapons, which could include small arms and light weapons, ammunition, or even their parts and components. Scope also refers to which activities and transactions will be covered by the Treaty, such as imports, exports, transfers, transit, and brokering amongst many others.

The criteria of the Treaty could include a prohibition of arms sales to countries if there is a substantial risk that the arms could be used to commit serious violations of international law, such as genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes. Or the Treaty could say that States should not transfer weapons that are used to support terrorist acts. Or, the Treaty could simply give a list of things that States should take into consideration when determining whether to authorize an arms transfer, such as socio-economic or sustainable development.

The ATT will be implemented by States at a national level. It will not create a supra-national body to enforce the ATT, or tell States what they can and cannot transfer and to whom. National sovereignty is paramount to the ATT and it will likely describe what States should include in their national systems, but not give the precise details of how to do it.

As part of the Prepcom work, the Chairman of the process, Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina, summarized the disparate views of Member States and produced a Chairman's draft paper. This draft paper is a reference document for the negotiations, but is not the basis for the negotiations or a draft of the Treaty. It includes many of the ideas proposed by Member States and as a result, has contradictory, unclear, and undeveloped ideas, as well as things that are completely impractical or unnecessary. Although that has been frustrating for many States and for civil society, the paper was useful in providing the structure of an ATT, it allowed States to present ideas and views concerning an ATT, and it was an important confidence building measure for all States to demonstrate that no one was pre-judging or developing an ATT in advance.

The goal of the July negotiations is to develop an ATT with common international standards for the global trade in arms and that to curb irresponsible and illegal trade.  The ATT would presumably make it more difficult to justify arms transfers to governments that will use them against internal opposition or to commit human rights abuses. Clearly, the ATT is not a panacea, but it will help create norms of State behavior with regard to arms transfers and give States another tool in their foreign policy tool boxes to highlight particular inimical sales.

The ATT needs to be practical in order to be effective-balancing worthy aspirations and ideals and the reality of the global arms trade. It will not help to have a Treaty that legitimizes irresponsible transfers nor one that creates a burdensome system that hinders the legitimate commercial trade in arms. The ATT is not about banning weapons. It is about developing, for the first time, rules of the game. It is about developing clear international standards for the global trade in arms. We will see how States do in July.

Photo Credit: U.S. Marine Corps photo by Capt. Howard G. Mariott, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Navy_051127-M-0718M-002_A_close_up_of_a_weapons_cache_in_the_ridgeline_on_Al_Asad_Air_Base.jpg