Opinion by Gary Mauser, Alan J. Chwick, & Joanne D. Eisen
Immense gratitude goes out to the Second Amendment Foundation for their hands-on data gathering at the 2024 Geneva, Switzerland meeting. SAF stood out as the sole Human Rights Organization present with a focus on safeguarding your right to own and carry firearms.
The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) entered into force on December 24, 2014, and will reach its tenth anniversary soon. Horrified by the misdeeds of mankind, the UN hailed it as the Treaty that would surely lead to peace because it would be ‘legally binding.’ According to Article 7 of the treaty, if an arms exporting country sees the possibility of misuse of a weapon, the “exporting State Party shall not authorize the export.” Countries that sign on to the ATT, would be expected to judge each other and make decisions about which countries could purchase weapons.
Did it work?
A person’s opinion about the actual demise of the treaty depends on what was expected. Did one wish to see actual progress toward peace via disarmament? There is no such appearance of peaceful progress. Laura Vatella, an ATT proponent writing for the ATT Monitor, 2/22/2024, in a report of civil society perspectives, opined, “the ATT was not fulfilling its goal of reducing human suffering…”
‘Not fulfilling?’ … That’s the answer.
But then, can a person be satisfied with only the appearance of working hard towards peace and disarmament? If one wants actual progress, then the ATT failed to perform as promised, despite its often touted, but somewhat missing, ‘legally binding’ aspect. The world is no closer to peace because of ATT features. And now, ten years in, the ATT, marginally alive because of the presence of left-over diplomats, is technically in its death throes and totally non-functional.
But perhaps, 2014 was not the best time to launch ATT. Let’s recall what happened to two countries that went through the process of voluntary disarmament and found the promises of peace to be false words. In January of 1994, Ukraine signed the Trilateral Agreement with Russia and the U.S. in which Ukraine, with promises of peace, would give up all of their original Russian nukes, which remained in Ukraine after the fall of the USSR. Then, in March of 2014, just as the ATT was about to come into force, Russia invaded and annexed the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea, now in 2022, Russia continued the invasion to try to take the rest of Ukraine. And that war is not over yet.
Then there is the Libyan example of broken promises. On December 19, 2003, in exchange for the promises of peace, and financial aid, Libya and the U.S. signed an agreement for Libya to give up all of its nukes. On March 14, 2011, as the ATT was getting written and just three years before it entered into force, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton backed the bombing of Libya and the destruction of the regime, leaving Libya a failed nation for all to see and remember.
After Gaddafi’s death, his son, Saif al-Islam surmised, “it’s a good lesson for anybody…that you have to be strong, you can never trust them…and you have to be on the alert. Because those people, they don’t have friends. Over one night, they change their minds, and they start bombing…and the same thing could happen to any other country.”
Those memories are alive, and the lessons are well learned but not spoken aloud in disarmament circles. They should be addressed because those examples set the scene for distrust and failure of the ATT.
Here’s the present situation.
The President’s Working Paper
The President of the Tenth Conference of States Parties (CSP10) H. E. Razvan Rusu, who is the Romanian Ambassador to the U.N., sent a draft working paper on February 9, 2024, implying that the theme of the Tenth Conference was The Role of Interagency Cooperation in the Effective Implementation of Arms Trade Treaty Provisions. He indicates that individuals and related entities are not cooperating, with each other, in a way that will save the world as promised, and until they can, work related to the ATT is failing. In effect, he complained that progress was at a standstill and that major changes are required before the group can get back to their primary job of furthering disarmament to achieve peace. This could be almost any organization suffering from uncontrollable internal and external dysfunction. But it’s a microcosm of societal challenges at the global level, a sad reminder of our very faulty species.
Rusu explained that the various participants and related entities don’t know what they’re doing. They have a “limited understanding of each other’s mandates, responsibilities, and priorities…with basic technical knowledge lacking in some entities…frequent changes in personnel involved…which leads to a lack of institutional memory, or prioritization of ATT obligations.” Among other problems, there is competition for scarce resources and there are different levels of seniority of the diplomatic officials involved leading to frustrating rivalries. And so, at almost ten years of age, the atmosphere lacks “trust and confidence.”
Adding to this disarray, Dumisani Dladla, the Head of the ATT Secretariat, left his position, so the Secretariat must search for someone to replace him, hopefully by August when the tenth anniversary Conference of States Parties is held.
If there is a bit of life to be found this coming August among the diplomats, we can foresee their clever response in last year’s documents. The theme of the Ninth CSP (CSP9) last August was the Role of Industry in Responsible International Transfers of Conventional Arms. We can surely understand the frustrated diplomats’ desire to hand off responsibility for failure to manufacturers to deal with and ultimately take the blame.
The Final Document of that last meeting includes, “States Parties are encouraged to take necessary steps to ensure that industry and private sector entities operating under their national jurisdiction conduct their business consistent with the object and purpose of the Treaty.” One may ask, how can business folks achieve success when diplomats with government tools at hand have been failing? This tactic of spreading the blame has been tried before with little success. Among the many responses, rational courts of law will have difficulty blaming and punishing manufacturers who would soon be seeking refuge in more friendly legal jurisdictions.
The coming CSP10 should be very interesting.
Diversion, Universalization And Transparency
These words, used by disarmament diplomats are important because they reflect the various intransigent problems faced daily by disarmament proponents.
Diplomats use the word ‘diversion,’ and their meaning is, “oh my, the weapons have gone missing.” At present, diversion appears to be uncontrollable and tends to damage the efforts of the ATT to control legal weapons transfers.
Universalization is the code word diplomats use when discussing the number of nations participating and the effort to entice more nations to join. One example of mistrust in the ATT system, explained by Rachel Stohl, is the fact that “there is an imbalance in the Treaty membership, with more major exporting states than major importing states. Thus, one area of focus for treaty universalization should be on increasing ATT membership among some of the larger arms-importing states to demonstrate that the ATT has benefits for all stakeholders in the arms transfer process.” However, “a more deliberate ATT strategy” is not going to change the fact that importing countries have more limited options for their defense and safety, and must make strategic decisions with care.
Transparency is a word used by diplomats that means after joining and paying dues, a country is required to disclose everything about its weapons to other countries. Without that transparency, weapons control is a fallacy. And so, as one might expect, transparency is declining, year by year, even within the small group of countries that were initially willing to report their information.
Article 13 describes an “initial report” and an annual report “concerning authorized or actual exports and imports…reports shall be made available and distributed to States Parties by the Secretariat.” These reports, and the transparency of weapons transfers and acquisition, are the most crucial aspects of the treaty because the knowledge and acceptability of weapons transfers should determine the successful non-violent outcome of each transfer. Transparency points out potential weaknesses of participating Countries, as it also shaves away some of their strength.
The following graph describes the state of reporting. Please note that Annual Reports Due But Not Received is growing, hence the coming ATT failure. An interactive version of this graph is available at: TheArmsTradeTreaty.org/annual-reports.html.
It becomes immediately obvious that the percentage of Countries reporting has decreased since 2014. However, according to the January 22, 2024 paper from the Working Group on Transparency and Reporting (WGTR), “reporting is a fundamental legal obligation of the Treaty, and … submitting initial and annual reports is an indicator of the commitment of a State Party to the Treaty.” So, yes, it’s obvious that commitment has waned, and mistrust has increased.
But there could be another problem brewing. In this document, the WGTR indicated that the peer-to-peer coaching program of regularly reporting countries helping nearby but non-compliant countries has intensified pressure on non-reporting countries. The ATT Secretariat is attempting to form a ‘Voluntary Regional Reporting Champions’ initiative to push reluctant Countries onward to compliance. This cannot possibly improve trust between countries. And since this does not address the core problem of State safety, and might even increase the perception of danger, any success remains to be seen. And there does not appear to be sufficient funding available to make timely reporting just a little more palatable.
Oh, About Money
The subject of finances is easy to explain, even without graphics. In a report by Dumisani Dladla, then head of the ATT Secretariat, we find the simple truth. He says, “The ATT is building an annual deficit of 7% average, which will be rolled over into next year’s budgets. The implication is that liquidity challenges will materialize in the medium term if outstanding contributions remain unpaid.”
The atmosphere at ATT meetings has always been one of financial constraint. Yet proponents know that the presence of money prompts words like ‘yes’ instead of ‘no’. Why has this situation been allowed to persist? What happened on the way to reasonable funding of this supposedly important Treaty?
There is a separate fund for a Sponsorship Programme that is designed to bring participants who cannot afford to attend meetings. This programme is expected to, “maximize the scale and diversity of participation of experts from States in ATT implementation and universalization to ensure representative and participatory discourse and decision-making during the meetings and, ultimately, contribute to strengthening implementation and universalization of the Treaty.” “As at 14 July 2023, the ATT Secretariat had received voluntary contributions from nine (9) donor states, namely Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Sweden, and Switzerland. To date, a total of USD 1,233,230 in sponsorship funds has been received into the sponsorship fund.” Since 2018, $1,223,230 (USD) has been donated by Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Sweden, and Switzerland, with only $105,701.70, donated from various countries in 2023.
There is also a Voluntary Trust Fund with an Outreach Programme which has received a total of USD 11,594,692.89. The VTF is seen as part of the universalization effort – as outreach and encouragement to countries interested in joining. Established by the CSP2, its purpose is to assist countries that “require international assistance to implement this Treaty.”
We are not discussing huge amounts here, yet we should be, and we would be if there were a serious, systematic process designed for success.
Don’t forget Gender is at fault as well….
The Human Dilemma
It’s long been true that some countries are more successful than others, and because “Might (so often) Makes Right,” countries can and do make war with each other, so maps change. The most serious flaw in the ATT is that countries know that map changes are frequent. In this unstable time, a Country’s survival depends on both perceived and actual strength, not its stage of disarmament.
Perhaps the thoughtless, naive, too-rapid jump by the UN to disarmament as the holy path to peace was a dream that needs a bit more logical thought. Given the ten-year failure of the ATT to show any progress, perhaps the activists involved need to step aside to let fresh eyes look at their mess. Perhaps the UN and its member governments should concentrate on providing security and good governance instead of demands for disarmament that promises peace but too often leads to violence.
Perhaps we should accept the President’s letter as a warning and should seek out the “lessons learned” from the ATT’s failure. Is the world ready for unilateral, voluntary disarmament and its obvious dangers?
Perhaps we need a long period of security before nations will feel comfortable abandoning their populace to the whims of stronger neighbors.
Draft Working Paper Presented By The President Of The Tenth Conference Of States Parties To The Arms Trade…
About The Authors
Gary Mauser is a professor emeritus at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, Canada. Check out his blog at JusticeForGunowners.ca for more information.
Alan J. Chwick has been involved with firearms much of his life and is the Retired Managing Coach of the Freeport NY Junior Marksmanship Club. He has escaped New York State to South Carolina and is an SC FFL (Everything22andMore.com). AJChwick@iNCNF.org | TWITTER: @iNCNF
Joanne D. Eisen, DDS (Ret.) practiced dentistry on Long Island, NY. She has collaborated and written on firearm politics for the past 40+ years. She, too, escaped New York State, but to Virginia. JoanneDEisen@cs.com
from https://ift.tt/8bgLdcR
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment