Especially note the Swiss-Canadian meeting on small arms to be held in Geneva, June 18-22, 2007.

______________________________________________________________________________

Reaching Critical Will

The First Committee Monitor

Week Two: October 9-13, 2006

Speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) during the thematic debates last week, Finland said, “everyday, everywhere, people are affected by the side effects of irresponsible arms transfers.” As there is currently no comprehensive internationally binding instrument available to provide an agreed regulator framework for this activity, the EU welcomes the growing support, in all parts of the world, for an ATT.

The resolution enjoyed widespread support across Africa, Europe, and Latin America. Among the cosponsors are a few major or emerging exporters of weapons, including France, Germany, Italy, Serbia, Romania, and Bulgaria, and countries that have been devastated by armed violence such as Colombia, Haiti, Liberia, and Rwanda.

According to the Control Arms Campaign, however, a few major arms exporters remained skeptical of the resolution, preferring only a call for the UN Secretary General to collect state's views on the feasibility of an ATT. Governments would decide on a GGE in the future. The campaign, run by Amnesty International, Oxfam International, and the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA), has been encouraging governments to support an ATT since October 2003.

During the thematic debates on conventional arms, Russia also said they would rather “squeeze out” all the potential from the existing instruments on conventional arms rather than start a new legal framework to address conventional arms proliferation.

A few governments that are not yet co-sponsoring the resolution expressed support for an ATT or efforts to better regulate the international transfer of arms. Republic of Korea, for example, said, “we share the concern that legal transfers of conventional arms are sometimes used as cover for illegal transactions, especially small arms and light weapons. To address this problem, an effective, transparent system of controls over international arms transfers is a prerequisite.”

On Tuesday, October 10, the authors of the resolution introduced a new draft text that incorporated several of the suggestions from governments. Maintaining most of the key elements of earlier drafts, the new resolution does not include a reference to “unrestrained” arms transfers, which several governments thought could be misinterpreted. It also includes a rewording of a preambular paragraph that addressed the need for an ATT.

The Control Arms Campaign indicated that they expected more governments to co-sponsor the resolution. They said many governments from North Africa and Asia have been expressing support for the resolution. A vote on the resolution is expected on Monday, October 23 or Wednesday, October 25....

Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW)

During the thematic debate on Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW), states continued to express disappointment with the lack of outcome in the SALW Review Conference (RevCon) in July. Opportunities for reviving the SALW process came with the tabling of the annual 'omnibus' resolution on SALW and an informal meeting to discuss Canada's proposal for SALW inter-sessional meetings.

Co-sponsored by South Africa, Japan and Colombia, the draft omnibus resolution calls for the UN SALW process to continue with a biennial meeting of states (BMS) to be held in New York no later than 2008,“as stipulated in the [UN] Programme of Action” on SALW (PoA). Emphasizing the importance of the continued implementation of the PoA, including voluntary reporting, the resolution further determines that the BMS will be the framework for reporting on implementation of the International Tracing Instrument adopted by the General Assembly in 2005.

Canada hosted an informal meeting with states and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to discuss the proposed SALW inter-sessional meeting that would be hosted by Switzerland, June 18-22, 2007 in Geneva. The objective of the meeting would be “to identify and/or refine global principles to govern the transfer of SALW throughout the world.” The Suggested Global Guidelines for National Control Governing Transfers of SALW, agreed at the April 2006 Nairobi Conference on Transfer Controls, would be the departure point. These principles are very close to those proposed by the Control Arms campaign as the basis for an Arms Trade Treaty on all conventional weapons. (See ATT report) All UN member states would be invited to participate at this inter-sessional meeting, as well as UN agencies, international and regional organizations and NGOs, the latter solely in an advisory manner. This meeting is intended to be complimentary to any formal process agreed by states, so there would be no formal statements. Kenya, France, Switzerland and the UK expressed their support for the meeting. Italy was supportive but questioned whether the starting point of the meeting should be linked so strongly to the Nairobi text.

On Thursday, the thematic debates on conventional weapons opened with a statement by the President of the RevCon, Ambassador Prasad Kariyawasam of Sri Lanka. He expressed frustration with some states' inability to compromise on issues during the RevCon. He blamed the failure of the conference to agree an outcome document on states' lack of confidence in the UN's ability to address disarmament issues; the unresolved issues of non-state actors and civilian possession; and an unreasonable interpretation of the consensus rule. He went on to say that the RevCon result as not a reason for discouragement and stressed the need for periodic reviews of PoA implementation, as envisaged in the PoA. States expressed general agreement with Ambassador Kariyawasam's assessment.

The floor then opened for general SALW comments during which Brazil (on behalf of MERCOSUR, or the Southern Common Market), Canada, Costa Rica, Finland (on behalf of the EU), Kenya, Mozambique, New Zealand and the Republic of Korea expressed disappointment that the RevCon did not agree on an outcome document and reaffirmed their states' commitment to implementing the PoA. Additionally, all but Mozambique made direct references to the need for BMS follow up meetings. According to the EU,“[t]he review cycle should culminate in a Review Conference.”

The session continued on Friday with statements by Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Moldova, Norway and Switzerland, all of which highlighted the negative ways in which the illicit trade in SALW affects the world. Indonesia, Japan, Norway and Switzerland directly expressed support for the omnibus SALW resolution, with its promise of follow-on after the RevCon. However, Israel used the RevCon failure to support its interest in a narrow interpretation of the PoA, claiming that some states diverted the focus of the RevCon away from the illicit trade in SALW. In Israel's view, this put into question the effectiveness of future follow on process.

The session ran over the allotted time and will continue on Monday 16 October.... (Emphasis added)