UN arms trade treaty can save many lives – if it is robustly enforced

Before any deal goes ahead, arms exporters – including the UK – must ask how and where the weapons are going to be used. (http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2014/sep/25/un-arms-trade-treaty-exports-sales?CMP=twt_gu)

Anna Macdonald

You do not have to be a military expert to know what damage weapons such as missiles fired from military aircraft, drones, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars can do to civilians. Watching the news this year, we have seen all too often stories of ordinary people losing their lives.

Leaders have been wringing their hands, apparently without a clear idea of how to help halt the inexorable rise in civilian deaths in the Middle East, east Africa and Ukraine.

In these circumstances, there is no substitute for targeted diplomacy, but new international law regulating the global trade of arms and ammunition is being introduced, with the specific aim of reducing the pain and suffering caused by armed violence and helping to prevent conflicts erupting in the first place. The UN arms trade treaty (ATT) is being ratified. It is the first legally binding international treaty to bring the arms trade under control, obliging states to ensure responsible and effective controls are put in place on all types of international transfers of conventional arms, ammunition, and parts and components.

It is sorely needed.

Every day up to 2,000 people die from armed violence. Countless more lives are devastated by the use of weapons in conflict zones. The situation in South Sudan is just one example of why there is an urgent need for the ATT. In the world’s newest country, thousands of lives have already been lost this year and nearly 2 million people have fled their homes – yet more and more weapons flood into the country each day, fuelling the violence. Many people are anxious to return home in spite of the humanitarian crisis, but fear for their safety because gross human rights violations – ethnic killings, rape, revenge attacks and the targeting of children – are taking place each day.

But it is not just the human cost of conflict that takes a huge toll. The arms trade also has a devastating impact on the economic development of poor countries. Research by Oxfam estimated that between 1990 and 2006, Africa lost an estimated cumulative total of $284bn as a result of armed conflict (pdf) – on average $18bn per year. This annual loss is compounded by the consistent upward trend in military expenditure in fragile and conflict-affected countries.

The inevitable result is a lack of investment in basic services, which is devastating for the 1.5 billion people living in areas affected by fragility, conflict or large-scale organised criminal violence. According to the World Bank, on average, low-income fragile or conflict-affected states lag 40-60% behind other low- and middle-income countries in millennium development goal achievement (pdf).

Under the ATT, arms transfers will not be judged specifically on whether they will have a detrimental impact on development or poverty reduction but, if implemented effectively, the socio-economic benefits of the treaty could be immense.

The treaty will also play an important role in curbing gender-based violence (GBV) in conflict zones. About 66,000 women die each year as a result of GBV. Under the ATT, states that export arms will be obliged to consider the risk that the weapons could be used to facilitate serious acts of GBV or violence against women and children.

More than 50 states will have signed and ratified the treaty by the end of this week, triggering “entry into force” (meaning the treaty becomes international law) by 24 December.

It will take determination and political will from those states that have ratified the treaty to ensure it is enforced. There will be no room for hypocrisy or double standards. Before any arms deal goes ahead, pointed questions must be asked about how and where the weapons are going to be used – and no one can turn a blind eye to the answers or put political interests before international law. All deals will need to be assessed against strict criteria in the treaty and if there is a substantial risk the transfer will breach any of those criteria, then the arms cannot be legally transferred.

This treaty demands a radical shift in behaviour by the major arms exporters who must lead the way in demonstrating a new sense of responsibility when it comes to trading in arms.

In recent years, the UK’s prime minister, David Cameron, has led trade delegations promoting arms sales to states with patchy human rights records such as India and the United Arab Emirates. If the UK is serious about its ATT obligations, such trips are going to have to change significantly. Adhering to the treaty needs to come before promotion of UK arms exports. The UK simply cannot claim to be upholding the principles of the treaty and meeting the ATT criteria, while at the same time pushing arms and ammunition to human rights abusers around the world.

Russian indifference to the ATT – both as an exporter and an importer – could limit its success. In fact, some fear the treaty could lead to a growth, rather than reduction, in Russian arms exports, with unscrupulous states joining Syria and Egypt and turning to Moscow for their weapons as the enforcement of the treaty leads other supply chains to dry up.

But this misses the point. Once the treaty enters into force and becomes binding international law, it will create a strong deterrent for all countries – even those not a party to it – to end uncontrolled arms transfers. It has happened before, for example, following the development of the mine ban treaty and it will happen again. A comprehensive treaty will help accelerate and develop a specific international norm, which, over time, simply cannot be ignored – even by Moscow. This will not happen overnight, but with proper enforcement by states that have ratified, it has the potential to help transform the arms trade.

The ATT will not be able to turn back the clock. It cannot bring back lives lost already through armed violence. But, with robust enforcement, it will prevent future suffering and save lives.

• Anna Macdonald is director of the Control Arms coalition, which campaigns for tough controls on the international arms trade. The coalition has more than 100 organisations, working in 120 countries and includes international NGOs such as Oxfam and Amnesty International as well as many regional and national level organisations.