Today is Monday, July 28, 2014rss RSS feed

By Ted R. Bromund, Ph.D.

Ban Guns

The Arms Trade Treaty, Week 2: The Treaty Is Getting Worse

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News from The Heritage Foundation

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News from The Heritage Foundation

Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)-  Late on Friday (March 22nd, 2012) , the president of the U.N. Conference negotiating the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) released his latest draft of the treaty.

A final draft will supposedly come out Wednesday evening, but the changes between now and then should not be substantial, as delegations will then not have time to ask their national capitals about any major new issues before the conference ends on Thursday.

The holier-than-thou brigade, led by nations such as Norway and nongovernmental organizations such as Amnesty International, are already complaining that Friday’s draft is too weak. From their point of view, nothing would ever be good enough, but in a way, they’re right. The treaty does not fully include ammunition. It still contains a major loophole allowing nations to ignore the treaty entirely if they have (or claim to have) a defense cooperation agreement with another nation, a key Indian demand. It still allows nations to sell arms unless there is an “overriding” risk of human rights violations. If a nation discovers such a risk after it agrees to make a sale, it is only “encouraged,” not required, to stop the sale. Finally, the new treaty draft “encourages” nations to do many things that are not actually mandatory: Treaty supporters strongly dislike this sort of discretionary language.

The U.S. has won two victories. The scope of the treaty is defined more tightly than before, and the treaty now applies only the standards of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which the U.S. has ratified. It does not explicitly include the Additional Geneva Protocols, some of which the U.S. has not ratified.

But the most important change in the draft treaty is a major defeat for the U.S. As I foreshadowed in my report on Thursday, the draft now relies on a “knowledge” standard—i.e., before the U.S. sells conventional arms, it is supposed to assess whether it has “knowledge” that they will be used to commit human rights violations. This standard would be used to criticize U.S. sales retrospectively and would be the basis of investigations by the U.N. on the argument that, even if the U.S. did not in fact know about impending violations, it should have known. This standard is completely unacceptable and by itself demands a U.S. rejection of the treaty.

This is not the only weakness in the draft treaty. Its reference to “acts of gender-based violence” in paragraph five of the principles is an open invitation to the U.N. to apply its theory that individual firearms ownership is by definition an undesirable example of masculinity. It still refers to “end users”—individual firearm owners— in Article 11. It effectively makes the definitions of arms contained in the U.N. Register of Conventional Arms nationally binding, which turns part of this voluntary program into a binding treaty commitment and would increase the pressure on the U.S. to include small arms in the formal register.

The draft treaty’s amendment procedure is still unacceptable in that it appears to make amendments adopted by any treaty conference binding on all treaty signatories, even those not at the conference. The preambular passage on the civilian ownership and use of firearms, which was already weak, is now weak and ungrammatical as well. The treaty still opens with separate “Preamble” and “Principles” sections, a novel format to which the U.S. has rightly objected.

That is not a complete list of the draft’s weak points, but it shows that, far from getting better, the treaty is in fact getting worse.

The other major group of nations at the conference —the dictators— have also won on a few points. The treaty now makes much more of the need to eliminate the supply of arms to terrorists. This sounds like a good thing, but in the context of the treaty, the term terrorist actually refers to anyone who rebels against a dictatorship. But the new text also rejects the Arab theory that the purpose of the treaty is to guarantee their right to buy arms no matter how many human rights abuses they commit. It is hard to see how the mere use of “terrorist acts” will satisfy them.

The size and complexity of several key articles in the new draft makes them unwieldy, and there are many cross-referenced articles, which makes the text even more complicated. Key terms such as import and export (never mind the much more complicated term brokering) remain undefined. My sense overall is that the conference president has tried to split the difference by giving Norway’s group the “knowledge standard,” keeping ammunition out of the scope to satisfy the U.S., keeping the contract clause for India, and adding more emphasis on terrorism for Russia and the Arabs.

It is not clear if this approach will work. In my view, the U.S. cannot accept Article 6, and I am not sure that the holier-than-thou brigade will be willing to accept a treaty that continues —predictably— to be riddled with loopholes.

About Heritage Foundation
The Heritage Foundation is the top conservative think tank in the United States. Their blog starts your morning off right with “The Morning Bell,” a blogpost that brings you up to speed on current issues, and then updates you throughout the day on a variety of issues concerning conservatives. Visit: http://blog.heritage.org

About Ted R. Bromund, Ph.D.:
Ted R. Bromund studies and writes on British foreign and security policies and Anglo-American relations as senior research fellow in The Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom. He also explains why America must defend and advance its unique leadership role in the world. Visit: http://blog.heritage.org/author/tbromund/ to read more.

Ammoland Click to read AmmoLand FTC Marital Disclosures Distributed to you by - AmmoLand.com – The Shooting Sports News source.
  • 3 User comments to “The Arms Trade Treaty, Week 2: The Treaty Is Getting Worse”

    1. MaxEffectUSA on March 27, 2013 at 5:07 AM said:

      We should not BE in the UN, it’s filled with many enemies, we should defund them and give them a deadline (1yr) to leave the USA.

    2. Good ideas, but we can not count on our government to do what they pretend, concerning this treaty. We the people are the only ones who can kick the UN out and cease to be a member. Talk is cheap and it is how you vote or instruct your congress to vote on issues. The UN has out lived it’s time and has never worked for us. We support them with our money, military, and blood. They do nothing for us. I have never seen any benefit for them being on our soil. Only they have the benefits.

    3. DaveGinOly on March 28, 2013 at 12:06 AM said:

      . . .the draft now relies on a “knowledge” standard—i.e., before the U.S. sells conventional arms, it is supposed to assess whether it has “knowledge” that they will be used to commit human rights violations. This standard would be used to criticize U.S. sales retrospectively and would be the basis of investigations by the U.N. on the argument that, even if the U.S. did not in fact know about impending violations, it should have known. This standard is completely unacceptable and by itself demands a U.S. rejection of the treaty.

      Curious to know if the US government is actually opposed to this. If so, that would be a major point to use in the argument against similar domestically-imposed firearms legislation. In particular, I’m talking about punishment of a firearms seller who sells to someone he “knew, should have known, or had reason to believe” the purchaser was disbarred from the right to arms.

    Leave a Comment

    • Sign up Ammoland for your Inbox

      Daily Digest

      Monthly Newsletter

    • Recent Comments

      • James C Barcliff Sr: I have followed Daniel Defense weapons for many years and now is my chance to own this really...
      • BRZCory: Why did you do a disservice to everyone on the graphic?!!! Green-Yellow-Red. In that order of difficulty....
      • bob: Idiot looks like a bad guy from Batman, lol Such a shame he likes to piss on his oath and the Constitution:(
      • Granny Grunch: Even if you do carry concealed..why take a chance by going into a no gun zone? Stay far away,stay...
      • DanH: So as of right this very second, DC should be changed to yellow on that map.
    • Social Activity

    • Most Popular Posts

    • Google+ Direct Connect

    Copyright 2014 AmmoLand.com Shooting Sports News | Sitemap | Μολὼν λαβέ

    Win a Daniel Defense DDM4v9 Rifle

    Subscribe and receive our emails , the drawing will be August 15, 2014 maybe you will be the lucky shooter receiving a Daniel Defense DDM4v9 Rifle. For more information visit the Daniel Defense promotional page.
    Monthly email subscription from Ammoland
    13506376
    14097288