United Kingdom Ambassador Jo Adamson's tasty soundbite in the final plenary of the Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty became the mantra for those states--the overwhelming majority--that wished to adopt the draft ATT put forward by the Conference President, Ambassador Peter Woolacott. In practical terms, Ambassador Adamson is absolutely correct. The Russian Ambassador to the UN, while resolutely blocking Mexico's doomed attempt to push through the treaty "on the basis of consensus", explicitly acknowledged as much. Clearly, the votes are there in the UN General Assembly for a straightforward adoption of the ATT, perhaps as early as the first week of April. Surely this is a triumph, albeit a temporarily frustrated one?
There must remain a sense of unease, however, for those who proclaim that UN disarmament machinery, operating under the rule of consensus, can deliver meaningful agreements. The ATT will only exist because of the possibility of voting in another forum. Otherwise it would be dead in the water, and states would be forced to go outside the UN for a stand-alone process, further underlining the UN's impotence in limiting the destruction of modern armaments. In any event, India and Russia will in all likelihood not sign the ATT, let alone ratify it. China's position is uncertain, and they studiously avoided commenting on the substance in their closing remarks to the Conference. The Arab League is against the treaty, as are a number of Asian countries, even though none blocked its adoption aside from the DPR Korea, Iran, and Syria. Universality will, sadly, remain a pipe dream.
We have the Conference on Disarmament that cannot agree on a mandate, let alone a treaty. The CCW is going nowhere, and slowly. The Security Council is largely divided on protection issues. Even the ATT Secretariat may be established outside the UN, such are the doubts about the capacity of this now aging institution to act effectively to protect civilians against armed conflict and armed violence. What then is the appropriate forum for addressing either conventional arms or weapons of mass destruction today? Can the Human Rights Council help to fill the normative void within the UN? Perhaps buttressed by recourse to the type of stand-alone processes launched by Canada and Norway, respectively, to prohibit anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions?
Let us hope so. For otherwise, the lessons of the ATT may ultimately be that it was not "just success", it was also "failure deferred".
Very disappointing indeed. Thanks again for the blog. What was your feeling, how big do you think was the number of states that were quietly happy that the decision wasn't adopted? Were the three delegations simply the scapegoats who don't care much about their reputation in UN negotiations while some others sat there in silence but might actually be glad that the treaty wasn't adopted?
ReplyDeleteWell, THIS self-criticism seems rather uncalled-for. On the opposite: What we have now as ATT is far weaker than what most states have as export legislation. The arms lobby will now start to attack national legislations, arguing that the problem of arms trade has been solved on the international plane and that not having the same arms exports rules as, say, Russia would bring them in a disadvantage compared to their rivals.
DeleteAnd I fear that many NGOs will not put as much effort into defending or improving national legislations than they have been in advocating for the ATT.
Grateful for some thoughts on the significance of the provision in Art.26(2) that "This Treaty shall not be cited as grounds for voiding defence cooperation agreements concluded between States Parties to this Treaty." Does such a provision undermine the purpose of the treaty? Will defence cooperation agreements become the new business model for the arms trade?
ReplyDeleteThanks for the question. No, this does not undermine the treaty, far from it. It would have been better not to have the provision, but India in particular argued hard for its inclusion (ironically given their reluctance to now adhere to it). Defence cooperation agreements between States Parties will not be rendered void by the ATT, but they certainly do not override the ATT. States Parties that respect the ATT will therefore be forced to rely on contractual clauses in their defence cooperation agreements to avoid the risk of penalties for not providing weapons required by such agreements (where going ahead with such transfers would violate their ATT obligations).
DeleteYour article is full of humor..
ReplyDeleteAlaska Fishing Trips packages
I enjoyed reading your article... hope to read more updates from you.
ReplyDeletevery well said.. keep posting more.
ReplyDeleteWater Damage
any update of Conference on Disarmament?
ReplyDeletehoping to be a part of that conference..
ReplyDeleteStorage Units Lake Forest CA
may i know if there is any update on this conference i truly want to know more about this topic
ReplyDeleteGreat data for Leviton For Sale
Let us hope so. For otherwise, the lessons of the ATT may ultimately be that it was not "just success", it was also "failure deferred".
ReplyDeleteI also hoping for this
what happen to Arms Trade Treaty? any final decision?
ReplyDeleteI will bookmark this for future update.
ReplyDeleteI will support this kind of treaty regardless of everything.
ReplyDeleteThis is very interesting. I will follow this. Keep it up.
ReplyDeleteThis is so amazing. i hope i will find your other works! pretty good!
ReplyDeleteLots of idea from this article! thanks for sharing i hope many people will read like this!
ReplyDeleteWe must review all the details. And have a good decision.
ReplyDeletehello sir/mam , your article is full of knowledge , keep it up thanksss .
ReplyDeleteThis topic is give me idea now i learn more about this article i hope we have a new update Thank you.
ReplyDeleteThe Security Council is largely divided on protection issues. Even the ATT Secretariat may be established outside the UN, such are the doubts about the capacity of this now aging institution to act effectively to protect civilians against armed conflict and armed violence. Arms Trade I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed surfing around your blog posts.
ReplyDeleteUtterly pent content material
There must remain a sense of unease, however, for those who proclaim that UN disarmament machinery, operating under the rule of consensus, can deliver meaningful agreements. The ATT will only exist because of the possibility of voting in another forum. thanks for information .
ReplyDeleteThere must remain a sense of unease, however, for those who proclaim that UN disarmament machinery, operating under the rule of consensus, can deliver meaningful agreements. The ATT will only exist because of the possibility of voting in another forum. Otherwise it would be dead in the water,Justice I hope it reaches your targetted audience. all the best thank you
China's position is uncertain, and they studiously avoided commenting on the substance in their closing remarks to the Conference. The Arab League is against the treaty, as are a number of Asian countries, even though none blocked its adoption aside from the DPR Korea, Iran, and Syria. Universality will, sadly, remain a pipe dream.
ReplyDeletesuccess deferred i hope i will find your other works! pretty good!
United Kingdom Ambassador Jo Adamson's tasty soundbite in the final plenary of the Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty became the mantra for those states--the overwhelming majority-success deferredthanks for information .
ReplyDeleteCan the Human Rights Council help to fill the normative void within the UN? Perhaps buttressed by recourse to the type of stand-alone processes launched by Canada and Norway, respectively, to prohibit anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions?
ReplyDeletesuccess deferred I hope it reaches your targetted audience.
while resolutely blocking Mexico's doomed attempt to push through the treaty "on the basis of consensus", explicitly acknowledged as much. Clearly, the votes are there in the UN General Assembly for a straightforward adoption of the ATT.
ReplyDeletesuccess deferredit was also "failure deferred".
Can the Human Rights Council help to fill the normative void within the UN? Perhaps buttressed by recourse to the type of stand-alone processes launched by Canada and Norway, respectively, to prohibit anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions?
ReplyDeletejust successI hope it reaches your targetted audience.
The Security Council is largely divided on protection issues. Even the ATT Secretariat may be established outside the UN, such are the doubts about the capacity of this now aging institution to act effectively to protect civilians against armed conflict and armed violence.Kingdom Ambassador thanks for information .
ReplyDeleteThe Security Council is largely divided on protection issues. Even the ATT Secretariat may be established outside the UN, such are the doubts about the capacity of this now aging institution to act effectively to protect civilians against armed conflict and armed violence.Kingdom Ambassador, to prohibit anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions
ReplyDeleteALLCASINO บาคาร่า คาสิโนออนไลน์ Casino Online ยอดนิยมครบจบที่สุดในไทย เปิดประสบการณ์ สนุกไปอีกขั้น กับคาสิโนออนไลน์ slot pg ที่เหนือระดับ โปรแรงเวอร์ กิจกรรมเพียบ แรงสุดในไทย
ReplyDeletepgslot ยอดเยี่ยมเกมออนไลน์ สล็อตบนโทรศัพท์เคลื่อนที่ เป็บเว็บเกมออนไลน์ที่อยากจะแนะนำที่สุดต้อง pgslot-th.com เกมแบบใหม่ ไม่มีเบื่อ ไม่ซ้ำๆซากๆ ในแบบการเล่นเดิมๆอีกต่อไปๆ
ReplyDelete