yes / Historically, UN conferences have been criticised for resulting more in compromises than in
commitments to real change, which is also a charge that has been levelled against the UN
Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects (UN Small
Arms Conference). The consensus-based approach adopted throughout the negotiations had
the advantage of binding all participating States to all aspects of the agreed Programme of
Action (PoA), but it also ensured that it would be difficult to achieve a sufficiently rigorous and
comprehensive agreement on all of the measures required to tackle the trafficking,
proliferation and misuse of small arms and light weapons (SALW). Therefore, in spite of the
efforts of many governments and NGOs, the UN Small Arms Conference did not agree
sufficiently robust agreements in several areas. Nonetheless, it was a valuable and productive
process. The resulting PoA includes a reasonably comprehensive set of key principles and
commitments, which provide a basis for taking forward action at national, regional and global
levels. The PoAwas agreed by all of the participating States, amounting to more than 100,
and each are politically bound to adopt and implement it.
Given that the UN Small Arms Conference was the first of its kind, its achievement in
generating political will and momentum for efforts to control SALW is important. Although
many of the commitments are weaker and less comprehensive than hoped for by many
governments and organisations, it is significant that the PoAcontains at least some important
commitments in all but two of the `core¿ issue areas raised by States. The two exceptions
relate to transfers to non-State actors and to civilian trade, possession and use of SALW,
restrictions which were strongly opposed by the USA. Equally, human rights related issues
were noteworthy by their absence in the PoA.
Whilst the process of reaching agreement began with a far-reaching draft PoA in December
2000 (A/Conf.192/L.4), most of the comments that were tabled on this text during the second
Preparatory Committee in January 2001 came from countries that sought to weaken its
commitments. The subsequent draft (A/Conf.192/L.4/Rev.1) was therefore weaker, with the
result that progressive States faced an uphill task in seeking to strengthen its provisions.
The next draft PoA emerged at the UN Small Arms Conference itself in the form of a third draft
(A/Conf.192/L.5). Although still limited in a number of key areas ¿ such as export criteria and
transparency ¿ this document went further than L.4/Rev.1 in a number of respects and included
specific international commitments, including on brokering and tracing lines of supply. This,
however, proved too ambitious an agenda for a small group of States and in the end the document
that was adopted by consensus (A/Conf.192/L.5/Rev.1) represented a lower-level compromise.
Despite the difficulties of agreeing the consensus-based PoA, the process culminating in the
agreement was perhaps as important as the agreement itself. UN Small Arms Conference
represented the first time that all UN Member States had met to discuss the illicit trade in SALW
in all its aspects with a view to agreeing a comprehensive set of measures to address the
problem. Although many of the commitments contained in the PoAare couched in equivocal
language that will allow States to do as much or as little as they like, it is clear that the UN Small
Arms Conference has contributed to a much better understanding, amongst all stakeholders, of
the nature of the illicit trade in SALW and of the particular concerns and priorities of different
countries and sub-regions. It is also clear that although the Programme of Action provides a set
of minimum standards and commitments which all states should adopt, it also encourages
further action from all States willing to adopt more stringent commitments and stronger
programmes. There is a willingness among a number of States to build upon the PoAand take
more concrete and far-reaching measures at national, sub-regional, regional and international
levels, such as specific arrangements for tracing co-operation, or mechanisms to co-ordinate
e fforts to improve stockpile security or weapons destruction. This briefing provides a critical assessment of key provisions in the UN Small Arms
Conference PoA. Section 1 measures the overall outcomes of the conference against those
that the Biting the Bullet (BtB) project proposed as optimal conclusions, and suggests ways to
put the commitments contained in the PoA into practice. Section 2 assesses the
implementation and follow-up commitments contained in the PoA, and identifies ways of
promoting the implementation of Sections III and IV, as well as options for making the most of
the Biennial Meetings of States and the Review Conference in 2006. Section 3 examines
funding and resourcing possibilities for the PoA including identifying needs, mobilising
resources and matching needs with resources. The final section of the briefing focuses on the
way forward, and in particular on how implementation of the PoA could build on existing
regional initiatives and develop common international approaches to controlling SALW
proliferation, availability and misuse. It also examines how action to prevent and combat the
illicit trade in SALW in all its aspects can be taken forward at sub-regional and regional levels
in conjunction with all major stakeholders, including civil society, in the period leading up to
the first Review Conference.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BRADFORD/oai:bradscholars.brad.ac.uk:10454/4273 |
| Date | January 2001 |
| Creators | Clegg, E., Crowley, Michael J.A., Greene, Owen J., Meek, S., Powell, S. |
| Publisher | British American Security Information Council (BASIC), International Alert and Saferworld. |
| Source Sets | Bradford Scholars |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Briefing Paper, published version paper |
| Rights | © 2001 The Authors, British American Security Information Council (BASIC), International Alert and Saferworld. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share-Alike License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/uk). |
| Relation | http://www.brad.ac.uk/acad/cics/publications/bullet/briefing/ |
Page generated in 0.0078 seconds