{"id":1282,"date":"2013-04-02T17:10:30","date_gmt":"2013-04-02T23:10:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/?p=1282"},"modified":"2013-04-03T09:21:42","modified_gmt":"2013-04-03T15:21:42","slug":"u-n-treaty-is-first-aimed-at-regulating-global-arms-sales","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/u-n-treaty-is-first-aimed-at-regulating-global-arms-sales\/","title":{"rendered":"U.N. Treaty Is First Aimed at Regulating Global Arms Sales"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Neil MacFarquhar, New York Times
\nclick here for original article<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

UNITED NATIONS \u2014 The United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to approve a pioneering treaty aimed at regulating the enormous global trade in conventional weapons, for the first time linking sales to the human rights records of the buyers.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Although implementation is years away and there is no specific enforcement mechanism, proponents say the treaty would for the first time force sellers to consider how their customers will use the weapons and to make that information public. The goal is to curb the sale of weapons that kill tens of thousands of people every year \u2014 by, for example, making it harder for\u00a0Russia<\/a>\u00a0to argue that its arms deals with\u00a0Syria<\/a>\u00a0are legal under international law.<\/p>\n

The treaty, which took seven years to negotiate, reflects growing international sentiment that the multibillion-dollar weapons trade needs to be held to a moral standard. The hope is that even nations reluctant to ratify the treaty will feel public pressure to abide by its provisions. The treaty calls for sales to be evaluated on whether the weapons will be used to break humanitarian law, foment genocide or war crimes, abet terrorism or organized crime or slaughter women and children.<\/p>\n

\u201cFinally we have seen the governments of the world come together and say \u2018Enough!\u2019\u00a0\u201d said\u00a0Anna MacDonald<\/a>, the head of arms control for Oxfam International, one of the many rights groups that pushed for the treaty. \u201cIt is time to stop the poorly regulated arms trade. It is time to bring the arms trade under control.\u201d<\/p>\n

She pointed to the Syrian civil war, where 70,000 people have been killed, as a hypothetical example, noting that Russia argues that sales are permitted because there is no arms embargo.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis treaty won\u2019t solve the problems of Syria overnight, no treaty could do that, but it will help to prevent future Syrias,\u201d Ms. MacDonald said. \u201cIt will help to reduce armed violence. It will help to reduce conflict.\u201d<\/p>\n

Members of the General Assembly voted 154 to 3 to approve the Arms Trade Treaty, with 23 abstentions \u2014 many from nations with dubious recent human rights records like Bahrain, Myanmar and Sri Lanka.<\/p>\n

The vote came after more than two decades of organizing. Humanitarian groups started lobbying after the 1991 Persian Gulf war to curb the trade in conventional weapons, having realized that Iraq had more weapons than France, diplomats said.<\/p>\n

The treaty establishes an international forum of states that will review published reports of arms sales and publicly name violators. Even if the treaty will take time to become international law, its standards will be used immediately as political and moral guidelines, proponents said.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt will help reduce the risk that international transfers of conventional arms will be used to carry out the world\u2019s worst crimes, including terrorism, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes,\u201d Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement after the United States, the biggest arms exporter, voted with the majority for approval.<\/p>\n

But the abstaining countries included China and Russia, which also are leading sellers, raising concerns about how many countries will ultimately ratify the treaty. It is scheduled to go into effect after 50 nations have ratified it. Given the overwhelming vote, diplomats anticipated that it could go into effect in two to three years, relative quickly for an international treaty.<\/p>\n

Proponents said that if enough countries ratify the treaty, it will effectively become the international norm. If major sellers like the United States and Russia choose to sit on the sidelines while the rest of the world negotiates what weapons can be traded globally, they will still be affected by the outcome, activists said.<\/p>\n

The treaty\u2019s ratification prospects in the Senate appear bleak, at least in the short term, in part because of opposition by the gun lobby. More than 50 senators signaled months ago that they would oppose the treaty \u2014 more than enough to defeat it, since 67 senators must ratify it.<\/p>\n

Among the opponents is Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the second-ranking Republican. In a statement last month, he said that the treaty contained \u201cunnecessarily harsh treatment of civilian-owned small arms\u201d and violated the right to self-defense and United States sovereignty.<\/p>\n

In a bow to American concerns, the preamble states that it is focused on international sales, not traditional domestic use, but the National Rifle Association has vowed to fight ratification anyway. The General Assembly vote came after efforts to achieve a consensus on the treaty among all 193 member states of the United Nations failed last week, withIran<\/a>,\u00a0North Korea<\/a>\u00a0and Syria blocking it. The three, often ostracized, voted against the treaty again on Tuesday.<\/p>\n

Vitaly I. Churkin, the Russian envoy to the United Nations, said Russian misgivings about what he called ambiguities in the treaty, including how terms like genocide would be defined, had pushed his government to abstain. But neither Russia nor China rejected it outright.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cHaving the abstentions from two major arms exporters lessens the moral weight of the treaty,\u201d said Nic Marsh, a proponent with the Peace Research Institute in Oslo. \u201cBy abstaining they have left their options open.\u201d<\/p>\n

Numerous states, including Bolivia, Cuba and Nicaragua, said they had abstained because the human rights criteria were ill defined and could be abused to create political pressure. Many who abstained said the treaty should have banned sales to all armed groups, but supporters said the guidelines did that effectively while leaving open sales to liberation movements facing abusive governments.<\/p>\n

Supporters also said that over the long run the guidelines should work to make the criteria more standardized, rather than arbitrary, as countries agree on norms of sale in a trade estimated at $70 billion annually.<\/p>\n

The treaty covers tanks, armored combat vehicles, large-caliber weapons, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles and launchers, small arms and light weapons. Ammunition exports are subject to the same criteria as the other war mat\u00e9riel. Imports are not covered.<\/p>\n

India, a major importer, abstained because of its concerns that its existing contracts might be blocked, despite compromise language to address that.<\/p>\n

Support was particularly strong among African countries \u2014 even if the compromise text was weaker than some had anticipated \u2014 with most governments asserting that in the long run, the treaty would curb the arms sales that have fueled many conflicts.<\/p>\n

Even some supporters conceded that the highly complicated negotiations forced compromises that left significant loopholes. The treaty focuses on sales, for example, and not on\u00a0all the ways in which conventional arms are transferred, including as gifts, loans, leases and aid.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is a very good framework to build on,\u201d said Peter Woolcott, the Australian diplomat who presided over the negotiations. \u201cBut it is only a framework.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Neil MacFarquhar, New York Times click here for original article UNITED NATIONS \u2014 The United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to approve a pioneering treaty aimed at regulating the enormous global trade in conventional weapons, for the first time linking sales to the human rights records of the buyers. Although implementation is […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1285,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"nf_dc_page":"","om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[8],"tags":[173],"class_list":["post-1282","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-arms-trade"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/04\/NATIONS-articleLarge.jpg?fit=600%2C424&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1282","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1282"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1282\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1284,"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1282\/revisions\/1284"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1285"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1282"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1282"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/peaceeconomyproject.org\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1282"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}