US switches position on arms trade treaty
by Joseph P. Tartaro
Executive Editor
Seven countries in early October launched a new campaign for the United Nations (UN) to start negotiations on a binding new treaty regulating the global trade in small arms, and the US responded with a shift in its policy of opposition on Oct. 14.
John Duncan, Britain’s ambassador for multilateral arms control and disarmament, said the on-going four-week meeting of the General Assembly’s disarmament committee will be “pivotal” in deciding whether to launch formal negotiations on a new Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).
Duncan said, according to Associated Press, that after three years of discussions, Britain, Argentina, Australia, Costa Rica, Finland, Japan and Kenya have proposed a resolution establishing negotiations to draft and agree on a treaty.
Many other countries in Europe, Africa and Latin America are backing the campaign to launch negotiations on an Arms Trade Treaty.
The idea of a treaty “is still contentious,” Duncan said. But supporters are hoping the disarmament committee will support the resolution and the 192-member General Assembly will approve the measure later this year. That would pave the way for negotiations leading up to an international conference in 2012 that would hopefully adopt the new treaty.
Last year, the assembly overwhelmingly endorsed a working group to move toward negotiations by a vote of 147-2, with the US and Zimbabwe casting the “no” votes. Others were either absent or abstained, including major arms exporters like China, Russia and Israel.
Supporters of a new treaty claim that it will not interfere with legal arms sales but will target illegal weapons transfers. However the treaty is being pushed by non-government organizations that have sponsored restrictions on the private sale and ownership of firearms in other countries.
The US reversed policy on Oct. 14 and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.
Some see the decision, announced in a statement released by the US State Department, as overturning the position of former President George W. Bush’s Administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the US would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), “operates under the rules of consensus decision-making.”
“Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly,” Clinton said in a written statement.
But that didn’t satisfy many of those pressing for passage of an arms trade treaty in the UN.
While praising the Obama Administration’s decision to overturn the Bush-era policy and to proceed with negotiations to regulate conventional arms sales, some groups criticized the US insistence that decisions on the treaty be unanimous.
“The shift in position by the world’s biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers,” Amnesty International and Oxfam International said in a joint statement.
However, they said insisting that decisions on the treaty be made by consensus “could fatally weaken a final deal.”
The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.
Under several administrations, both Democrat and Republican, the US has maintained a much more government controlled approach to small arms exports, which is one reason why many American officials have been less than enthusiastic about a new treaty.
Return to Archive Index