by Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF
The adoption of the first ever Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is being billed by many governments and civil society organizations as an historic event. And indeed it is. This marks the first time that the General Assembly has adopted legally-binding rules to regulate international transfers of conventional weapons. The ATT is also the first treaty to recognize the links between the international arms trade and gender-based violence. Both of these firsts signify meaningful advancement for international humanitarian law (IHL), human rights, and peace and security. However, the treaty’s deficiencies mean that it could be suseptible to manipulation and abuse by those who want to continue profiting from the arms trade. To ensure that the text adopted on 2 April makes a difference in practice, governments, civil society, and the United Nations, as they begin to implement and interpret the treaty, must avoid legitimizing the international arms trade and irresponsible transfers.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Looking to the future of the ATT: shifting attention to implementation
by Katherine Prizeman, Global Action to Prevent War
After more than a decade of advocating for and working towards a robust and comprehensive arms trade treaty (ATT), relevant stakeholders can now mark a conclusion to the first step in this process. This was an imperfect process that yielded an imperfect treaty. Nevertheless, the task now is to take what has been adopted and ensure that it has the most effective impact possible on the ground so that the human suffering caused by the illicit and unregulated arms trade—the original purpose of and impetus for this process—is prevented to the greatest extent possible.
After more than a decade of advocating for and working towards a robust and comprehensive arms trade treaty (ATT), relevant stakeholders can now mark a conclusion to the first step in this process. This was an imperfect process that yielded an imperfect treaty. Nevertheless, the task now is to take what has been adopted and ensure that it has the most effective impact possible on the ground so that the human suffering caused by the illicit and unregulated arms trade—the original purpose of and impetus for this process—is prevented to the greatest extent possible.
Monday, April 1, 2013
The failure of consensus
by Ray Acheson and Beatrice Fihn, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF
The events of Thursday evening mark the second time that governments have failed to adopt the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) by consensus.
Distance runner
by Dr. Robert Zuber, Global Action to Prevent War
Let us be clear about this: the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that will soon to come to pass is historic, but not necessarily epic. Ambassador Woolcott and his team (including the diplomats who chaired thematic consultations) did a masterful job of staying true to their mandate—a treaty with some robustness crafted in accordance with consensus provisions. We’re all tired, but we're not nearly done yet, and for reasons beyond the blocking of consensus that we witnessed yesterday.
Let us be clear about this: the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that will soon to come to pass is historic, but not necessarily epic. Ambassador Woolcott and his team (including the diplomats who chaired thematic consultations) did a masterful job of staying true to their mandate—a treaty with some robustness crafted in accordance with consensus provisions. We’re all tired, but we're not nearly done yet, and for reasons beyond the blocking of consensus that we witnessed yesterday.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
A tale of two treaties
by Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF
Since Friday, when the President released his second draft of the arms trade treaty (ATT), people have asked, “Whose treaty is this?” Is this a treaty that will protect human beings from armed conflict and armed violence, or is this a treaty that will protect the profits of arms manufacturers and exporters? Will it promote the interests of cooperative human security or militaristic state security? The release of the third draft text on Wednesday does not settle these questions.
Since Friday, when the President released his second draft of the arms trade treaty (ATT), people have asked, “Whose treaty is this?” Is this a treaty that will protect human beings from armed conflict and armed violence, or is this a treaty that will protect the profits of arms manufacturers and exporters? Will it promote the interests of cooperative human security or militaristic state security? The release of the third draft text on Wednesday does not settle these questions.
Preventing gender-based violence: a binding requirement in the new draft ATT text
by Ray Acheson, Maria Butler, and Sofia Tuvestad, Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom
To the question posed in the ATT Monitor earlier this week—is the prevention of armed gender-based violence (GBV) important enough to screen for in export assessments?—the answer is yes! The final draft Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) text released on Wednesday indicated that preventing armed gender-based violence is indeed important enough to be part of mandatory export assessments.
To the question posed in the ATT Monitor earlier this week—is the prevention of armed gender-based violence (GBV) important enough to screen for in export assessments?—the answer is yes! The final draft Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) text released on Wednesday indicated that preventing armed gender-based violence is indeed important enough to be part of mandatory export assessments.
New baby on the way: is it to be an orphan or everyone’s child?
by Jonathan Frerichs, World Council of Churches
After decades of gestation and years in labor, a new treaty seems well on its way to being born. What lies ahead for this new member of the global village? Will it be an orphan with few prospects in life? Or will there be many to take it in their charge and to give it a future? The almost impossible parentage involved looks certain to keep such questions alive.
After decades of gestation and years in labor, a new treaty seems well on its way to being born. What lies ahead for this new member of the global village? Will it be an orphan with few prospects in life? Or will there be many to take it in their charge and to give it a future? The almost impossible parentage involved looks certain to keep such questions alive.
Secretarial pool
by Dr. Robert Zuber, Global Action to Prevent War
The Arms Trade Treaty is now in the hands of states that will adopt the text, block the text, or send it on to the General Assembly or Secretary General to be disposed of in other ways.
The Arms Trade Treaty is now in the hands of states that will adopt the text, block the text, or send it on to the General Assembly or Secretary General to be disposed of in other ways.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Problems and proposals: how to close loopholes in the draft ATT
by Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF
With
only one day left until the final draft text of the arms trade treaty (ATT) is
released, all participants have expended tremendous efforts to either improve or
further undermine the current draft text. As it stands, the draft is not
reflective of the positions of the vast majority of states. It is certainly not
reflective of the urgency of regulating the irresponsible arms trade and
preventing its most horrifying effects. As the Liberian delegation said, the
current draft elevates the views of arms exporters above those of the victims of
those exports. Thus states that want a robust treaty have been actively
proposing language to close some of the treaty’s biggest loopholes and ensure
the treaty is comprehensive and effective.
Groundhog Day?
by Dr. Natalie J. Goldring
During the first few days of the “final” ATT conference, diplomats appeared to be making steady progress toward an Arms Trade Treaty that might be worthy of the name. Countries seemed focused on creating the strongest possible treaty, with useful interventions on the scope of the treaty and criteria for evaluating—and denying—arms transfers that were likely to pose humanitarian and human rights concerns. Joint statements from groups of diverse countries addressed issues such as public reporting, gender-based violence, and development. Moreover, the specific text suggestions offered by the so-called “skeptics” indicated a focus on ensuring that their interests were reflected in a treaty text, rather than simply blocking progress toward a treaty.
During the first few days of the “final” ATT conference, diplomats appeared to be making steady progress toward an Arms Trade Treaty that might be worthy of the name. Countries seemed focused on creating the strongest possible treaty, with useful interventions on the scope of the treaty and criteria for evaluating—and denying—arms transfers that were likely to pose humanitarian and human rights concerns. Joint statements from groups of diverse countries addressed issues such as public reporting, gender-based violence, and development. Moreover, the specific text suggestions offered by the so-called “skeptics” indicated a focus on ensuring that their interests were reflected in a treaty text, rather than simply blocking progress toward a treaty.
Final appeal
by Dr. Robert Zuber, Global Action to Prevent War
The clock continues to tick on this final negotiating session and the list of objections seems to be lengthening rather than shrinking. Moreover, these objections are generally not, as we had hoped, tied to specific intentions on the part of delegations to either adopt, abstain from, or walk away completely from the “final” text to be presented by Ambassador Woolcott Wednesday morning.
The clock continues to tick on this final negotiating session and the list of objections seems to be lengthening rather than shrinking. Moreover, these objections are generally not, as we had hoped, tied to specific intentions on the part of delegations to either adopt, abstain from, or walk away completely from the “final” text to be presented by Ambassador Woolcott Wednesday morning.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Honing in on the indispensables in the second draft text
by Katherine Prizeman, Global Action to Prevent War
With the release of the new President’s Non-Paper last Friday, delegations have been carefully examining the text in order to identify what has been improved, what has remained the same, and what new ambiguities have been introduced. Levels of satisfaction with the new draft text were varied, from the Arab Group’s statement that “none” of its views were represented to other delegations that were more positive on the draft.
With the release of the new President’s Non-Paper last Friday, delegations have been carefully examining the text in order to identify what has been improved, what has remained the same, and what new ambiguities have been introduced. Levels of satisfaction with the new draft text were varied, from the Arab Group’s statement that “none” of its views were represented to other delegations that were more positive on the draft.
Remembering the survivors: How the Arms Trade Treaty could forget the millions of victims of armed violence
by Eileen McCarthy, Action on Armed Violence
A strong and robust Arms Trade Treaty has the opportunity to save lives around the world. However, the current draft text fails to provide for those who have and will lose the most from an unregulated trade of arms—the victims of armed violence themselves.
A strong and robust Arms Trade Treaty has the opportunity to save lives around the world. However, the current draft text fails to provide for those who have and will lose the most from an unregulated trade of arms—the victims of armed violence themselves.
A step back in the regulation of SALW transfers
by Hector Guerra, International Action Network on Small Arms
Small arms and light weapons (SALW) were included in the scope of the 20 March President’s Non-Paper. This is a legacy of the enormous pressure exerted by the majority of participating delegations in last July's diplomatic conference and in spite of stern opposition by a few others. Several recent statements expressed how relevant and indispensable this inclusion is, given the role of SALW in armed violence worldwide, both in and outside armed conflicts.
Small arms and light weapons (SALW) were included in the scope of the 20 March President’s Non-Paper. This is a legacy of the enormous pressure exerted by the majority of participating delegations in last July's diplomatic conference and in spite of stern opposition by a few others. Several recent statements expressed how relevant and indispensable this inclusion is, given the role of SALW in armed violence worldwide, both in and outside armed conflicts.
Truth or consequences
by Dr. Robert Zuber, Global Action to Prevent War
The latest draft text has been picked over robustly by delegations and NGOs, some of which object to language, some to themes and concepts, and some to what they feel is a willful ‘ignoring’ of their previous suggestions.
The latest draft text has been picked over robustly by delegations and NGOs, some of which object to language, some to themes and concepts, and some to what they feel is a willful ‘ignoring’ of their previous suggestions.
Monday, March 25, 2013
The second draft: a treaty behind its time
by Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF
The President’s second draft of the arms trade treaty (ATT) released Friday evening fails to resolve almost all of the major problems in the draft text. While some language has been tweaked to improve clarity and a new section has been added on diversion, the most fundamental loopholes remain. The draft as it stands is ultimately inadequate to truly prevent human suffering or enhance peace and security.
The President’s second draft of the arms trade treaty (ATT) released Friday evening fails to resolve almost all of the major problems in the draft text. While some language has been tweaked to improve clarity and a new section has been added on diversion, the most fundamental loopholes remain. The draft as it stands is ultimately inadequate to truly prevent human suffering or enhance peace and security.
New ATT text fails in preventing armed gender-based violence
by Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will of WILPF
The provisions for preventing gender-based violence (GBV) in the President’s second draft arms trade treaty (ATT) text continue to undermine existing international law and obligations.
The provisions for preventing gender-based violence (GBV) in the President’s second draft arms trade treaty (ATT) text continue to undermine existing international law and obligations.
Control Arms reaction to President’s Non-Paper of March 22nd (Second Draft ATT)
Control Arms is highly disappointed with the first ‘substantive’ draft from ATT Final Conference President, Amb. Peter Woolcott of Australia. After extensive and broad consultations—following seven years of deliberations inside the UN—the draft should have clearly reflected the voice of the overwhelming majority of Member States.
Gift wrapped
by Dr. Robert Zuber, Global Action to Prevent War
The most significant change to the new text is the section on diversion. While the text still reflects language that more tentatively than definitively binds, there is at the very least a reinforcement of the responsibility to end diversion as a key rationale for the years of preparation and negotiations which will—this week or sometime soon—result in a series of formally acknowledged obligations within the realm of arms transfers.
The most significant change to the new text is the section on diversion. While the text still reflects language that more tentatively than definitively binds, there is at the very least a reinforcement of the responsibility to end diversion as a key rationale for the years of preparation and negotiations which will—this week or sometime soon—result in a series of formally acknowledged obligations within the realm of arms transfers.
Thursday, March 21, 2013
No real transparency, no real treaty
by Haley E Adams, NYU Law Students for Human Rights and Reaching Critical Will of WILPF
Through deliberations during the first week of the arms trade treaty (ATT) conference, transparency has become a buzzword, but it is not meaningless jargon: the notion of transparency strikes to core purpose of this Treaty. Without mandatory public reporting, the high common standards sought by states parties will be meaningless, mere words belying a stark and growing reality of the irresponsible and illicit arms trade measurable in staggering human costs. This treaty cannot succeed as a binding legal instrument without transparency in its implementation: words ripen into reality through collective compliance and mutual confidence. Mandatory, standardized compliance reporting among states parties is, then, the keystone to an operative set of collectively beneficial arms regulations.
Through deliberations during the first week of the arms trade treaty (ATT) conference, transparency has become a buzzword, but it is not meaningless jargon: the notion of transparency strikes to core purpose of this Treaty. Without mandatory public reporting, the high common standards sought by states parties will be meaningless, mere words belying a stark and growing reality of the irresponsible and illicit arms trade measurable in staggering human costs. This treaty cannot succeed as a binding legal instrument without transparency in its implementation: words ripen into reality through collective compliance and mutual confidence. Mandatory, standardized compliance reporting among states parties is, then, the keystone to an operative set of collectively beneficial arms regulations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)