From especially the 1950's, campaigns had been launched by the Afro-Asian nations in the United Nations for the institution of mandatory sanctions against South Africa. In all the early campaigns, South Africa had rather enjoyed the support of the United States, although the latter had always verbally condemned the South African policy of apartheid. When Kennedy became United States president in January 1961, this fact was due to change. In August 1963, an arms embargo was instituted against South Africa by the Kennedy Administration in an attempt to bring the verbal condemnation of apartheid in line with active action. The arms embargo, although not mandatory, was the first concrete, practical step taken by the United States in its opposition to the apartheid policy of the South African Government. In 1977 the embargo was strengthened to become a mandatory one. The purpose of this study is to analyse the institution as well as the implementation of the arms embargo by the different United States Administrations up to 1977. By doing that, the observer can judge the relative commitment of the United States to the arms embargo from president to president, thus drawing a wide conclusion on the role that South Africa played in the foreign policy objectives of the United States in the years that the arms embargo was in effect. The Afro-Asian clearly had an impact on the formulation of this policy, and part of the purpose of this study is to establish just how big that impact was. In order to do this, a wide selection of archival material as well as newspaper reports, articles in journals, governmental publications and some secondary sources were researched. The outcome is the conclusion that although the different United States Administrations from Kennedy to Carter generally adhered to the arms embargo, the implementation there-of depended mainly on what role the embargo played in the foreign policy objectives of each of these Administrations. For some, like Nixon and Ford, the strategic importance of South Africa weighed heavier than gaining the favour of the African nations, in comparison with Kennedy and Johnson who followed a midway. They didn't want to loose the privileges that the United States had in South Africa, while at the same time they wanted to appease the African countries in the United Nations. In the case of Carter, the implementation of the arms embargo was directly based on gaining the favour of the African nations, resulting in the institution of a mandatory arms embargo in October 1977. A future study on the role of that embargo in the formulation of the United States foreign policy, will be conducted as continuation of this study. / Vanaf die 1950's veral, is uitgebreide veldtogte deur die Afro-Asiatiese Iande in die Verenigde Nasies vir die instelling van verpligte sanksies teen Suid Afrika gevoer. In al die vroeere veldtogte, het laasgenoemde voortdurend die ondersteuning van die Verenigde State van Amerika (VSA) geniet, alhoewel daardie land altyd die SuidAfrikaanse apartheidsbeleid mondeling veroordeel het. In Januarie 1961 het Kennedy die president van die VSA geword, en daarmee het die ondersteuning van Suid-Afrika stadig maar seker begin afneem. In Augustus 1963 het die Kennedy-administrasie 'n wapenverbod teen Suid-Afrika ingestel in 'n paging om die mondelinge veroordeling van apartheid in lyn te bring met aktiewe optrede. Die wapenverbod, alhoewel dit nie verpligtend was nie, was die eerste konkrete, praktiese stap wat deur die VSA in sy opposisie teen die apartheidsbeleid van die Suid-Afrikaanse regering geneem is. In 1977 is die verbod uitgebrei na 'n verpligte een. Die doel van hierdie studie is om die instelling sowel as die implementering van die wapenverbod deur die verskillende Amerikaanse Administrasies tot en met 1977, te analiseer. Deur dit te doen, kan die navorser die relatiewe verbintenis van die VSA tot die wapenverbod beoordeel en sodoende 'n wye gevolgtrekking maak oor die rol wat SuidAfrika gespeel het in die buitelandse beleidsdoelwitte van die VSA gedurende die jare wat die verbod ingestel was. Die Afro-Asiatiese nasies het beslis 'n impak gehad op die formulering van hierdie buitelandse beleid, en deel van die doelwit van hierdie studie is om te bepaal hoe groat daardie impak werklik was. Ten einde by h!_erdie gevolgtrekking te kon uitkom, is 'n wye verskeidenheid argivale materiaal sowel as koerantberigte, tydskrifartikels, regeringspublikasies en literatuur bestudeer. Die uitkoms van hierdie navorsing is die gevolgtrekking dat alhoewel die verskillende VSA regerings vanaf Kennedy tot Carter oor die algemeen die wapenverbod ondersteun het, die implementering daarvan hoofsaaklik afhanklik was van die rol wat die verbod in die buitelandse beleidsdoelwitte van elkeen van hierdie Administrasies gespeel het. Vir party, soos byvoorbeeld Nixon en Ford, het die strategiese waarde van Suid-Afrika vir die VSA swaarder geweeg as die guns van die Afrikalande, in vergelyking met Kennedy en Johnson wat 'n middeweg gevolg het. Hulle wou nie die voordele wat die VSA in SuidAfrika gehad het, verloor nie, maar terselfdertyd wou hulle ook die Afrikalande tevrede stel. In die geval van Carter, was die implementering van die wapenverbod direk gebaseer op die guns wat die VSA in die Afrikalande kon geniet. Dit het gelei tot die instelling van 'n verpligte wapenverbod teen Suid-Afrika in Oktober 1977. 'n Verdere studie oor die rol wat daardie verbod in die formulering van die Amerikaanse buitelandse beleid gespeel het, sal as 'n opvolg tot hierdie studie onderneem word. / Dissertation (MA)--University of Pretoria, 1998. / Historical and Heritage Studies / MA / Unrestricted

The international community routinely implements embargoes in an effort to restrict the flow of small arms and light weapons into politically unstable regions. The effectiveness of sanctions fall into question when reports indicate that weapons continue to pour into embargoed territories. Using stochastic actor-based modeling, the current study investigates how shipment patterns change over time, and how trade patterns evolve in the presence of endogenous influences, such as embargoes, while controlling for corruption levels and national wealth (e.g., gross domestic product). The analysis here indicated that embargoes did have an effect in diverting illicit weapons trade through indirect ties. This was seen highest during the embargo implementation period and post embargo implementation period. The results stand to improve our understanding of this complex illegal global market and the role national control of corruption and gross domestic product play in the enforceability of these sanctions. In the final analysis what was discovered was that embargoes do effect change in the illegal arms trade network. This effect is seen in the form of indirect ties to end user countries. This suggests that improvements to policies and regulation on transshipment points need to be highly scrutinized.

yes / The last few years have seen the emergence of a series of regulatory initiatives that have been developed, partly in response to the twin agendas of human security and strong states, but which represent a specific reaction to the political economies deemed to underpin contemporary civil conflicts ¿ most notably the way in which local and global markets in everything from diamonds to drugs have been exploited to fund often vicious civil conflicts, particularly in environments characterised by endemic corruption. This new body of local and global regulation, what might loosely be characterised as new laws and new codes to address the political economies of the new wars, include: UN embargoes on diamonds and timber being used to fund conflicts, the development of regimes such as the Kimberley certification system, and initiatives to ensure the transparent and effective use of natural resource revenues. Generally represented as a progressive response to the political economies that drive contemporary civil conflicts, these new initiatives have produced a set of formal and informal regulatory frameworks that are, in fact, profoundly asymmetric in their scope and application. Indeed, one of the defining features of these initiatives is not so much the impartial application of regulations to firms and corrupt elites but either their selective application or, alternatively, their selective relegation in favour of an emphasis on far weaker norms and voluntary codes. The aim of this paper then, is first, to examine the operation of the new codes and regulations in general and to demonstrate the problems in their implementation. Second, the paper will then go onto examine one specific innovation ¿ the Kimberley Certification Scheme designed to prevent the trade in conflict diamonds in order to demonstrate the asymmetries that exist in current regulatory mechanisms designed to introduce ethical markets. It will do this in particular by focussing on the impact of certification for the diamond sector in Sierra Leone. A key argument in this section will be that whilst this new regime for conflict diamonds aims to transform behaviour through transparency and policing, and whilst it appears to have had some success, it has not in fact transformed the conditions that gave rise to the illicit diamond trade in Sierra Leone prior to conflict. Along with the problems inherent in broader development policy on Sierra Leone this raises serious questions. In particular, whilst there may be little short-term risk of conflict, the planned departure of UNAMSIL, continued regional instability, persistent corruption and the failure to fundamentally transform the nature of the diamond market in Sierra Leone, all raise question marks regarding the nature (and indeed sustainability) of the peace that is being created.

yes / The 1990s witnessed a change in the way wars were fought as the amount of available weaponry increased and the types of actors engaged in warfare multiplied. The opening up of the international arms trade, in particular with new buyers and more channels of supply, has raised concerns about who purchases weapons and for what use. Afeature of this changing nature of conflict has been the continuing, if not growing, presence of mercenaries and the emergence of private companies contracted to provide military and security services. These range from logistical support and training to advice and procurement of arms and on-the-ground intervention. This briefing highlights how the activities of mercenaries and private military and security companies can contribute to small arms proliferation and misuse and examines steps the international community can take at the UN Small Arms Conference and elsewhere to effectively combat mercenarism and regulate the activities of private military and security companies. The role played by these companies relates not only to provisions contained in the contracts they sign with their clients to provide large amounts of weaponry, but also how the military and security services and training that they provide contributes to the demand for weapons in the regions where they operate. There are a number of ways in which mercenaries and private military and security companies are involved in small arms proliferation. These include: l Arms brokering and transportation activities l Violations of UN arms embargoes l Impact on human rights and humanitarian law l Driving demand for small arms Various measures already exist to ban the activities of mercenaries and regulate some of the activities of private military and security companies either through national legislation or international agreements. However, there is concern these efforts are neither comprehensive nor accepted widely enough to effectively control the activities of mercenaries and private military and security companies.

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

yes / Arms embargoes are one of the principal tools of states in seeking to prevent, limit and bring an end to armed conflict and human rights abuses. Despite the frequency with which arms embargoes have been imposed, there are significant problems with their implementation. Pressure is therefore growing for the international governmental community to act in order to ensure that the political commitment embodied by the imposition of arms embargoes is matched by the commitment to ensure their rigorous enforcement and to achieve enhanced human security on the ground. Increasing the effectiveness of arms embargoes is a specific aim of the United Nations Programme of Action for Preventing and Combating the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects1 which specifically calls upon states "To take appropriate measures, including all legal or administrative means, against any activity that violates a United Nations Security Council arms embargo in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations".2 Accordingly, within the context of the implementation of the UN PoA, the overall aim of this paper is to explore ways in which the international community can act in order to strengthen the impact of arms embargoes and enhance human security. It will begin by examining the purposes, processes and effects relating to arms embargoes, with particular attention to those agreed at international (UN) level, and by highlighting issues of concern in each regard. An overview of the main issues and challenges facing implementation of arms embargoes will include the elaboration of three case-study examples showing the impact of UN arms embargoes on the availability of arms and on human security and a further five that illustrate the dilemmas faced by states in seeking to implement arms embargoes. Priority areas for attention in any international effort to strengthen the effectiveness of arms embargoes will be followed by more extensive proposals for enhancing international embargo regimes within the context of implementing the UN PoA. Whilst it is recognised that the UN PoA contains measures that relate only to the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons (SALW), if implemented fully, many of these would serve to strengthen the international apparatus of control, information exchange and provision of assistance relating to arms proliferation and misuse as a whole. In turn, this would greatly enhance the implementation of UN arms embargoes. Therefore, as well as providing an opportunity for reviewing progress on implementing the PoA, the first Biennial Meeting of States in July 2003 is clearly a major opportunity for states to address a number of the pressing challenges facing states in the implementation of UN embargoes.