On April 2nd the United Nations had a breakthrough moment – after years of negotiating the definitions of many terms and at the end of several rounds of revision 154 States voted to adopt the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).
Every year thousands of people are killed, injured, raped or abused as a resolute of irresponsible arms transfers.
Colombia’s armed conflict has seen human rights violations committed by all sides; guerillas groups, paramilitary and security forces. And it is one of the very conflict cases many claim has motivated this Arms Trade Treaty.
What is the treaty for?
The Arms Trade Treaty is the first international treaty aimed to regulate the multibillion dollar arms trade that has been fueling conflicts and human rights abuses.
The treaty seeks to control the transfer of weapons through a legally-binding instrument that establishes common international standards to prevent weapons from failing into the hands of terrorists, insurgents, and human rights violators.
Proponents of the treaty believe it will make it harder for regimes like Syria committing human rights violations, to acquire arms.
Why? It requires each exporter to assess the risks associated with an arms deal prior to trade, and prohibits the sale of conventional weapons where there is substantial risk that the arms will be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international human rights, or acts of terrorism.
When will the treaty be in force?
50 countries need to ratify the Treaty.
To ratify a treaty, the State first signs it – as many states did yesterday – and then have the document pass through the respective legislative requirements.
Once ratified, enforcement is even then only up to the nations who have agreed to move forward with the treaty.
How will this affect Colombia?
Supporters of the ATT process argue the treaty will strengthen global security, but will it strengthen the security within Colombia?
What effect will it have on Colombia’s 50 year long conflict, fueled by small arms, a conflict that continues to threaten the lives of civilians?
The ATT has no jurisdiction over the domestic use of weapons in any country – it only requires countries that ratify it to establish national regulations to control the transfer of conventional arms.
Despite not turning up to sign the treat, we can assume from the vote to adopt the resolution, the statements made by the Colombian government and their report submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations that Colombia will ratify the treaty.
The Colombian government has acknowledged that while the absence of an ATT is not “the sole reason for easy access to conventional arms, the existence of a strong and comprehensive ATT will greatly reduce the likelihood of conventional arms ending up in the hands of irresponsible end-users.”
Let’s assume, for the sake of this article, it has been ratified.
The weapons used to fuel the conflict in Colombia come from a number of sources – national production by the government (production from non-government entities is illegal), government imports and illicit trafficking by guerrilla groups.
Reports suggests that illegal weapons are manufactured in at least five different countries, exported to Colombia’s neighboring states, and then illegally diverted into Colombia.
Many suggest weapons are also diverted from the stockpiles of Colombia’s security forces. For instance, the government of Venezuela has been accused of smuggling weapons to the FARC.
In Colombia the manufacturing of small arms, ammunition and/or their components is prohibited, excluding government manufacture.
Colombia is considered a low ranking country when it comes to exporting weapons – it exports some $8,000,000USD compared with the $54,000,000USD it imports which by world standards is not very high either – So economically the ATT will not significantly alter the import/export landscape.
Yet the supply of weapons in Colombia is not lacking, continually finding its way onto the streets.
According to GunPolicy an estimated 3,100,000 civilians in Colombia own firearms. The number of unlawfully held guns cannot accurately be counted but is estimated to be roughly 2,000,000 more. Meanwhile the defense force is reported to have just 500,000 firearms.
What is even more concerning is that the prevalence of illicit arms or “home-made” firearms and the number of weapons smuggled into the country is one of the highest levels in the world. To access weapons in Colombia one is not reliant on imports from supplier states.
So will the treaty work here?
While the government is positive, let’s not be fooled – the ATT is not the miracle cure to the conflict nor the gun violence that affects many in Colombia.
The treaty has no effect on weapons already in a country.
Colombia’s problems with small arms and arms smuggling, will not go away with the implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Decreasing incidences of violence and the use of arms in conflict is not just about a more transparent supply of weapons but eliminating both the number of weapons already in Colombia as well as changing a cultural mindset which relies on small arms to commit petty crime and gang violence or to protect in self-defense from those attempting to perpetrate such violence.
This is not to deny the treaty will have some impact, but it won’t solve the problem of the amount of small arms already fueling armed conflict in the country.
How will the peace process with the FARC work with the treaty?
Should the peace-negotiations be successful (and lets plan, they will be), the challenge will be much greater than controlling what weapons cross the border, by whom and for whom. There will also be an urgent need to collect the small arms that already exist in ‘the wrong hands.’
Peace will not come the moment the pen is pressed firmly to a piece of paper. We have seen it in other post-conflict cases whereby the small arms once used to fuel a conflict end up on the streets in the hands of youth looking for new ways to make a living. To avoid this, means getting the FARC leaders to agree to demobilize.
The next step is to actually demobilize the FARC and other rebels groups who have relied on guns to make their livelihood. Also a problem is the fact that the peace negotiations primarily involve those at the top and neglect the wishes, and concerns of those fighting on the ground – not to mention the groups not involved in the peace process at all.
The government has an obligation as well…
Demobilization must be executed in a way that the small arms do not end up on the streets in the hands of former soldiers, former rebels or civilians who turn to violent crimes such as gang violence and robbery as a way to meet means ends. This means, the government ensures that former soldiers and rebels are given other ways to make ends meet; trained in vocational skills, given the opportunity to finish their schooling.
Demobilization isn’t the only answer, it needs to be implemented in conjunction with better trained police force with zero tolerance to gun violence and improved civilian protection and stronger regulations on internal gun control.
Most importantly, it means changing a culture reliant on guns. We have already seen a significant decrease in the access of weapons and gun crimes since Bogota’s days of having the title as the Murder Capital of the World. So we know it can be done!
This is not only important for Colombia, but also for the security of neighboring countries. We need to learn from the case of Libya where we are now seeing thousands of weapons used to fight the Libyan war in the hands of Malian rebels. The international community and the government of the day neglected a holistic approach to eliminating guns.
If ratified, the Arms Trade Treaty might have an impact on ensuring the supply of weapons into Colombia is not increased (although we all know there are other means), but the work on small arms control for Colombia needs to happen from within.
It needs to happen simultaneously with the implementation of the peace negotiations.
The old adage says you should hope for the best but plan for the worst. In the case of Colombia’s pending peace, I would say we need to hope for the best, an effective peace-agreement which is more than just words on paper. This means we also need to plan for the best by realizing post-peace agreement we genuinely address the problem of illicit weapons.
There is a lot of work to be done in Colombia towards eliminating the supply of weapons and this means we need to start planning how to do this now.
Photo, Reuters.