• Print
• Share

Update Report No. 3: Small Arms

Report in Word Format • PDF Format

Expected Council Action
An open debate on small arms is scheduled for 25 April, the first such debate since March 2006. A report from the Secretary-General is due on 21 April. (Postscript-the report was released on 17 April) (S/2008/258).

South Africa, as president of the Council for April, has organised the debate in part to keep a focus on options for the Council to improve its handling of the small arms dimension when dealing with country-specific issues—in particular, arms embargo and disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) programmes.

At press time, it was still unclear whether any outcome document to the debate, such as a presidential statement, would be possible. It is unclear whether potentially divisive issues such as civilian ownership of small arms will become a focus. (The Council’s failure to agree on an Argentinian effort in 2006 to adopt a resolution and its inability to reach consensus even on a presidential statement for over a year will be a factor in the background.)

Key Issues
The term “small arms and light weapons” covers arms intended for both civilian and military use. Small arms include revolvers and self-loading pistols, rifles and carbines, sub-machine guns, assault rifles, and light machine guns. include heavy machine guns, hand-held under-barrel and mounted grenade launchers, portable anti-aircraft guns, portable anti-tank guns, recoilless rifles, portable launchers of anti-tank missile and rocket systems, portable launchers of anti-aircraft missile systems, and mortars of calibres of less than 100 mm. The category also includes ammunition and explosives. (This list is available in the report of the Panel of Governmental Experts on Small Arms of 27 August 1997) (A/52/298).

Worldwide, more than 640 million small arms and light weapons and 16 billion rounds of ammunition are in circulation today, with an additional eight million new weapons entering the market each year. They are estimated by the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva to be responsible for more than half a million deaths each year, including 300,000 in armed conflict. Of the 49 major conflicts in the 1990s, small arms were the key weapons in 47 of them. In his 2005 report, In Larger Freedom, the Secretary-General noted that “the accumulation and proliferation of small arms and light weapons continues to be a serious threat to peace, stability and sustainable development.”

Small arms also represent a sizeable industry: valued at about $4 billion a year in authorised trade and over $1 billion a year in unauthorised trade. The top exporting countries, according to the Small Arms Survey 2005, included the US, Italy, Brazil, Germany, Belgium, Russia and China.

Small arms’ direct impact on conflicts has presented a variety of problems for Council members and for the Security Council in discharging its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. The Council has highlighted the importance of this issue by regularly addressing small arms as one of the thematic issues that regularly appear on the Council’s agenda, beginning in 1999 (with nine debates held and seven presidential statements adopted between 1999 and 2006).

The principal focus of UN work on small arms has been through the General Assembly. The 2001 Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat, and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects and the 2005 International Instrument to Enable States to Identify and Trace, in a Timely and Reliable Manner, Illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons are examples of past multilateral responses to the problem. There are also ongoing activities–mainly though the work of groups of governmental experts mandated by the General Assembly – on the issue of illicit brokering of small arms, on ammunition and stockpile management, and on an arms trade treaty. Finally, regional initiatives have also been ongoing, particularly focusing on illicit trade but also on the demand and supply-sides of the issue. (For more information please visit our 22 June 2006 Profile on Small Arms.)

The main issue for the Security Council is how it seeks to complement the work currently being conducted on small arms by the General Assembly, taking into account the fact that the General Assembly bears primary responsibility for the creation and advancement of norms relating to disarmament, but also the fact that small arms are specific factors in most of the country-specific security issues being addressed by the Council under its responsibility.

The Secretary-General in his previous reports to the Council on small arms made 12 recommendations on ways and means in which the Council could contribute to dealing with the question of illicit trade in small arms in situations under its consideration:

1. call upon states to develop an instrument to enable states to identify and trace illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons;
2. call upon states to use and provide technical and financial assistance to the Interpol Weapons and Explosives Tracing System;
3. encourage states to assist the Secretariat in establishing a “small arms advisory service;”
4. enhance interaction between the Security Council and the General Assembly on issues relating to small arms in the context of the Programme of Action;
5. call upon states to enforce all Council resolutions on sanctions, including arms embargoes;
6. continue efforts to identify the links between the illicit trade in small arms and the illicit exploitation of natural resources as well as with the drug trade and develop innovative strategies to deal with those;
7. include in the mandate of peacekeeping operations clear provisions regarding DDR and measures for the collection and disposal of illicit and surplus arms;
8. strengthen the financing of DDR programmes under the budget for peacekeeping operations;
9. encourage states to establish legislative measures to ensure control over the export and transit of small arms, in particular the use of authenticated end-user certificates;
10. pursue more vigorously and expeditiously arms embargoes, and give particular attention to the restriction of the supply of ammunitions;
11. consider coercive measures against those violating arms embargoes such as establishing monitoring mechanisms; and
12. enhance transparency in armaments.

(For more details please refer to our March 2006 Forecast report, 22 June 2006 Profile on Small Arms, and 13 April 2007 Update report.)

There are currently two main approaches to countering the problem of the proliferation of small arms. The “supply-side” approach focuses on increasing accountability and government regulation of small arms in their production, transfer, sale and end-user certification. This approach aims to prevent arms transfers to states and non-state actors who are likely to intensify conflict situations or commit serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. It entails the use of mechanisms such as sanctions, public pressure, weapons-marking and increased post-transfer oversight.

The second, “demand-side” approach seeks to curb weapons already present in conflict areas by using external means such as peacekeeping operations to improve security within the state, while developing DDR programmes, and scaling back the number of available weapons. The Council has used both approaches in specific situations, focusing on arms embargoes, which apply to both state and non-state actors, and on the inclusion of DDR provisions in peace agreements, and as integral parts of UN peacekeeping mandates.

Broadening the discussion may include the following issues:

• Licit trade
  As most countries affected by small arms violence are not arms producers themselves, attention has been focused on the supply of and trade in small arms. In the General Assembly, concern has focused primarily on illegal arms sales, but the illicit trade is connected to the legal trade in small arms. The lack of transparency in even legitimate trade presents a significant challenge for the control of the trade.

• Illicit production
  Most of the world’s small arms and light weapons are legally manufactured in large factories with the consent of the host state. A legally produced weapon therefore only becomes part of the illicit trade after it has left the factory—hence the supply-side approach. Focusing on legal production remains highly sensitive as three of the P5—the US, China and Russia—are among the top exporting countries for small arms. However, some illicit production also takes place. Although it only comprises a tiny proportion of weapons manufacturing, its impact on the proliferation of small arms at the local level can be significant.

• Illicit transfer of ammunition
  Contrary to weapons, ammunition is often quickly depleted. For intensive weapon use in a conflict, stocks, therefore, need to constantly be replenished. As a consequence, the oversight or disruption of the provision of ammunition represents an opportunity for controlling the import of small arms and limiting the misuse of weapons. Ammunition has little global regulation and continues to reach state and non-state actors despite arms embargoes. This is a direct concern for the Council.

• Illicit brokering
  According to the report of the group of experts on illicit brokering (A/62/163), an arms broker is “a person or entity acting as an intermediary that brings together relevant parties and arranges or facilitates a potential transaction of small arms and light weapons in return for some form of benefit, whether financial or otherwise.”Although this is not always an illicit activity, brokers have played a central role in transferring weapons to illicit destinations, in particular to countries under UN embargoes and in conflict zones. Although there have been initiatives at the General Assembly level, because illicit brokering hampers the efficiency of arms embargoes, it also is of direct interest to the Council.

These issues remain highly controversial within the General Assembly and divisions are likely to be also reflected within the Security Council.

The report published in February 2006 noted some positive developments with regard to the establishment of an international instrument to trace illicit small arms (this was achieved in December 2005), inter-mission cooperation with regard to the prevention of cross-border movement of arms and combatants, the illicit exploitation of natural resources, the implementation of DDR programmes and the monitoring of arms embargoes.

The Council may also be interested in assessing its own progress in including the small arms problem when it deals with conflicts or other thematic issues on its agenda. Since the last report by the Secretary-General in February 2006, the Council has specifically mentioned the issue of small arms in one resolution (on the protection of civilians in armed conflict) and in five presidential statements particularly when addressing the role of regional organizations. (Please see the list of UN documents below.) It has dealt with arms in the context of arms embargoes and DDR processes in at least 40 resolutions on the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia, Nepal, Liberia, Côte d’Ivoire, Haiti, Sudan, Rwanda, and Lebanon and regarding arms transfers to terrorist groups. Some new developments in the Council since 2006 have included:

• the request to member states, in coordination with the UN Stabilisation Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH), to engage with the government of Haiti to address cross-border arms trafficking control (resolutions 1780, 1743 and 1702);
• the creation of the AU/UN Hybrid operation in Darfur (UNAMID) with a mandate to monitor the arms embargo imposed against all non-governmental entities and individuals in Darfur (resolution 1769);
• the establishment of the UN Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) with the mandate to monitor the management of arms and armed personnel of both sides (resolution 1740);
• the replacement of the UN Operation in Burundi (ONUB) by UN Integrated Office in Burundi (BINUB) with a specific mandate to support the Burundi government in efforts to combat the proliferation of small arms and light weapons (resolution 1719); and
• the establishment of an arms embargo for any entity or individual in Lebanon (resolution 1701).

Options
An option is for the Council to address the level of implementation of the Secretary-General’s recommendations in a presidential statement. At press time, no draft was being prepared and, with the Secretary-General’s report appearing so late before the debate, a complex negotiated outcome is unlikely. A second option would be for Council members to decide to negotiate a text with a view to its adoption later in the year and for Council experts to begin work on a draft.

Council Dynamics
In 2006 the Council failed to reach agreement on an Argentinean initiative for a resolution to enhance Council input to the debate on small arms. In March 2007 South Africa took the lead on this issue by introducing a draft presidential statement requesting the Secretary-General to produce regular reports on small arms. (The failure to reach a consensus on the 2006 draft resolution left future Secretary-General’s reports in abeyance.) Although 14 Council members were supportive of the statement, the US was reluctant and argued that the Council should leave the issue entirely to the General Assembly. The strong personal opposition to UN action on small arms by then US Ambassador John Bolton appears to have had a role in making impossible any progress in this issue for about a year; in his 2007 memoir Surrender is not an Option, Bolton describes his role in the UN in a section titled “Foiling International Gun Control at the UN.”

Some Council members are particularly focused on the issue of disarmament and illicit trade in small arms: France, the UK, South Africa, and Burkina Faso. Africa has been the primary victim of illicit trade that has fueled deadly conflicts across the continent and made more casualties than any other types of weapons. It is agreed that small arms proliferation is one of the most serious threats in Africa. Therefore African countries are very engaged on the issue. Similarly, Latin American states have also suffered significantly from the availability of small arms and have among the highest rates of gun homicides in the world. Latin American states, too, are very supportive of the fight against the proliferation of small arms.

Many Council members seem to agree that for the Council the issue of small arms is best advanced on a country-specific basis, or within the framework of another theme on the Council’s agenda. There are some fears that trying to broaden the scope of discussions within the Council beyond the Secretary-General’s recommendations may actually be counterproductive at this stage, because of the sensitive issue of civilian possession of weapons. Although some continue to hope for the adoption of a specific resolution on small arms (Panama, the UK), they remain concerned that the US position may not allow the adoption of any text in the near future. In addition, other countries such as Indonesia also believe that the Council should be careful not to usurp the normative role of the General Assembly. However, there seems to be a large majority who believe that at a minimum, the Council could look into ways to reinforce its dealing with small arms in specific conflict situations.

UN Documents

Useful Additional Sources

• Small Arms Survey
• International Action Network for Small Arms
• The Center for Defense Information – Small Arms and Light Weapons
• UN Office for Disarmament Affairs – Small Arms and Light weapons
• Africa’s missing billions: International arms flows and the cost of conflict, Oxfam, October 2007
• United Nations Arms Embargoes: Their Impact on Arms Flows and Target Behaviour by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute and the Uppsala University Special Program on the Implementation of Targeted Sanctions, November 2007

• Print
• Share

• Share or print this post