by Gabriella Irsten, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF
As Ghana pointed out on 10 July, the arms trade treaty (ATT)
is not a treaty like any other. It is not specifically or only a humanitarian
treaty, a disarmament treaty, nor a trade treaty. While the views on what this
treaty should cover differ between UN member states, we can surely say that
many countries agree with Ghana's statement. The argument has been reiterated
in different ways by several delegations, such as by the Italian Ambassador on
11 July, who stated that ending human suffering is the fundamental ethical goal
of the ATT. In addition, referring back to the launch of this treaty, the UN
General Assembly resolution A/RES/61/89, “Towards an arms trade treaty:
establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer
of conventional arms" stated that the ATT should recognize “that arms
control, disarmament and non-proliferation are essential for the maintenance of
international peace and security” and reaffirm “respect for international law,
including international human rights law and international humanitarian law,
and the Charter.”
Multilateral disarmament and arms control processes within the United
Nations have long been operating in isolation from other UN organs. This has
lead to some governments being sceptical about the relationship between these
issues and human rights or international humanitarian law. Separating issues in this manner may make it
logistically easier to work within the UN, but unfortunately this practice does
not reflect the reality of human experience or the nature of international
security.
In real life, problems of arms proliferation and human
suffering are not isolated from one another. Therefore, the UN system needs to
reflect this and build bridges between institutions in order to have
appropriate tools to deal with modern human threats. As the South African
delegation expressed during the first week of negotiations, “The ATT should be
an international instrument that fills a glaring gap that currently exists in
the global arms control system.” This
objective should be extended: an ATT could fill a gap not only in the arms
control system but in the whole UN system. The ATT has great potential to link
arms control to human rights and establish an international instrument with an
holistic approach to effectively deal with problems facing today’s world. The
ATT is a great opportunity to build a new modern treaty that respond to
challenges to human security. The isolation of issues, as we have seen it in
international fora, is no longer enough in today’s complex, globalized
world.
A robust ATT could operate as a preventative tool against
conflict and human suffering. Most existing instruments deal with conflict and
suffering after it occurs, but real
protection can only be realized through prevention.
The question is whether governments want to take their
responsibilities of preventing conflict and protecting their citizens seriously
and if they are willing to make changes to their international behaviour that
will improve people’s lives. Today we are struggling to end poverty, armed
violence, and other injustices. All these issues are intertwined and we
therefore need a solution that will take all of them into consideration. They
all have a strong direct and indirect links to the spread of arms. Scare
resources are being used to buy weapons instead of being spent on poverty
reduction and on fulfilling social and economic rights. Today warfare is no
longer being fought on the frontline by armies; it is taking place within
countries and communities, meaning that the spread of weapons has a direct link
to the increase of civilian deaths. The excessive number of weapons in
circulation around the world makes it easier for actors to use them to violate
other human’s rights, lives, and dignity, both within conflicts and private
homes. If the ATT does not include aspects of international human rights law,
international humanitarian law, and gender-based violence as criteria for
regulating arms transfers, the international community will lose the chance to
build and treaty that is truly relevant for today’s threats.
