FRIDAY FILE - On April 2, 2013, a decades long campaign culminated in the signing of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) at the UN General Assembly. The ATT prohibits arms sales when there is a risk that weapons could be used to violate international humanitarian or human rights law.
By Amanda Shaw
Through the Reaching Critical Will programme the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) campaigned to ensure that the provision on gender-based violence was legally binding in the treaty. AWID interviewed Ray Acheson, Director of Reaching Critical Will about the treaty and what it represents for women’s rights.
What is the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT)?
Ray Acheson (RA): The ATT is the first legally binding, international agreement adopted by the UN General Assembly to regulate international transfers of conventional weapons and ammunition. It is also the first treaty to recognize the links between the international arms trade and gender-based violence (GBV). Both of these firsts signify meaningful advancement for international humanitarian law (IHL), human rights, and peace and security. However, the treaty’s deficiencies mean that it could be susceptible to manipulation and abuse by those who want to continue profiting from the arms trade. To ensure that the text adopted on 2 April 2013 makes a difference in practice, governments, civil society, and the UN, must avoid legitimizing the international arms trade and irresponsible transfers, as they begin to implement and interpret the treaty.
The treaty also addresses the illegal arms trade through its provisions on preventing diversion of arms to the illicit trade, and supplements the UN Programme of Action on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, which is a non-legally-binding agreement adopted by UN member states in 2001.
How did the campaign for ATT start and how have women's rights organizations been involved?
RA: In 1996, a group of Nobel Peace Laureates and NGOs drafted an International Code of Conduct for the arms trade. Since then, an active civil society campaign has been promoting the negotiation of a robust, comprehensive, legally binding treaty to establish standards and restrictions on the international trade in conventional arms.
The Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), along with the Women's Network of the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA), have been engaged in the treaty process since it began at the UN in 2006. We have consistently advocated for a legally binding provision on GBV and the recognition of women's contributions to disarmament, arms control, and peace and security. WILPF collaborated with IANSA Women's Network and Amnesty International to draft joint policy papers and to gather signatures from women's groups all over the world in support for including prevention of gender-based violence in the treaty. Our advocacy garnered support from over 100 civil society organizations and, by the end of negotiations, at least 100 government delegations.
What does the signing of the ATT mean in practice?
RA: The signing of the ATT signals a state's intention to seek ratification of the treaty through its parliament or other legislative body. After signing, countries are typically bound by the provisions of the treaty, although the treaty will only officially enter into force once a government has ratified it.
The treaty's implementation provisions require each state that has ratified the treaty to enact national laws and legislation and procedures to ensure the treaty is properly implemented. It also provides for conferences of states parties to review its implementation, though there is no international enforcement mechanism.
How are women's (and human) rights impacted by the arms trade?
RA: Many human rights are impacted by the arms trade, including socio-economic rights, rights of political participation, rights of access to health, food, etc. and rights to life and well-being. Above all else, weapons are tools of violence and repression by those that use them; and tools of financial gain by those who make and sell them. Conventional arms, especially those transferred without regulation, continue to kill or maim civilians; violate human rights; facilitate sexual violence and trafficking; obstruct economic and social development, including through the loss of livelihood; impede post-conflict rehabilitation and reconstruction; delay or prevent the return of refugees and internally displaced persons; negatively impact on national and international peace-building and humanitarian assistance efforts; and have other severe consequences that can persist for many years.
How does the ATT address gender-based violence?
RA: The ATT is the first treaty to recognize the links between the international arms trade and GBV. Article 7(4) of the treaty makes prevention of GBV part of the mandatory export assessment process and thus subject to possible transfer denials.
This means that states who are exporting arms are obliged to consider the risk that the weapons may be used to commit or facilitate serious acts of GBV or violence against women and children. States shall not be permitted to authorize the transfer where there is an ‘overriding risk’ of GBV, when it constitutes a violation of international humanitarian or human rights law, when it undermines peace and security, or when it forms part of transnational organized crime. It also requires states to act with due diligence to ensure the arms transfer would not be diverted to non-state actors such as death squads, militias, or gangs that commit acts of GBV. In addition to this, conflict-related GBV can indeed constitute war crimes, crimes against humanity, or other serious violations of international law as covered by the prohibition criteria of the ATT text.
Does the ATT contemplate and regulate new technologies such as drones?
RA: The ATT's scope does a poor job at accommodating new technologies, though it does allow for flexibility and possible amendment in this regard. The ATT utilizes the definitions of weapons and technologies as provided in the UN Register of Conventional Arms, at the time that the ATT enters into force. This means definitions refer to weapon systems that made sense more than two decades ago. The article dedicated to the Conference on States Parties provides for states parties to review “developments in the field of conventional arms” but does not explicitly allow for updates to the scope or definitions. However, many states have already indicated they will adopt a much broader scope than that enclosed in the treaty and that they will take the opportunity of future meetings to push for adapting the scope to cover emerging technologies.
What will happen if the worlds' largest arms exporters do not ratify the treaty?
RA: Russia and China abstained on the vote adopting the ATT in the UN General Assembly. The US voted in favor of its adoption and was even one of the co-sponsors of the resolution taking the treaty to the UN General Assembly after the ATT conference failed to adopt it by consensus. However, the US, and the other major exporters, will each have to sign and ratify the treaty in order for its provisions to be binding. If they fail to ratify the treaty, their actions will be outside of the law of this treaty.
But, with the support of the majority of exporting and importing states, this treaty will set a norm for the international transfers of conventional weapons. Indeed, this norm has already been established through the ATT negotiating process. It has been made clear that a norm exists against transferring weapons where there is a substantial risk that the weapons will be used to commit violations of human rights or IHL or to commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide etc. If the major exporters stay outside the treaty, they will still face condemnation from ATT states parties if they violate the treaty.
We can see this happening with the conventions banning anti-personnel landmines and cluster munitions: while the US, Russia, China and others have not ratified these treaties, they still feel compelled to give money for clearance and victim assistance activities and to refrain from using or selling these weapons in most circumstances. It is important to note that norm-building and norm-reinforcement are important aspects of treaty-making and can occur outside the letter of the treaty itself.
Find out more about the treaty here.