Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

The Arms Trade Treaty: Where 46% Eat Free

Friday, August 31, 2018

The Arms Trade Treaty: Where 46% Eat Free

The Fourth Conference of States Parties (CSP) to the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) concluded August 24th after yet another week of discussions on little more than administrative procedures and bureaucratic policies. Now, almost four years after it entered into force, the ATT continues to try to expand and remain relevant despite lacking the membership of major arms exporters China and Russia, importers such as India, and having a body composed of States Parties either unwilling or unable to comply with its most fundamental obligations.

Regrettably, the United States remains a signatory to the ATT, providing it with credibility and much needed financial support while at the same time lacking the ability to vote on its shape and direction. This lack of influence is especially alarming given the makeup of the U.S. delegation to the ATT, a delegation historically keen on remaining silent even in the face of direct criticism, and one which cowers at the thought of taking the floor to stifle attempts by developing nations to peddle the agenda of the global anti-firearms community.  

Thankfully, the United States’ tendency to remain silent had little impact on this year’s CSP. With few direct attacks levied against the United States, attendees were not left questioning if the delegations’ silence was tantamount to admission, but instead contemplating if the lack of participation this year was a deliberate attempt to remain off the record by a delegation operating without the approval of the current administration.

While we will likely never know the answer to this, one thing was clear at this year’s CSP: even without any opposition from the United States, the ATT is failing on its own.

For those unfamiliar with the ATT, its purported object and purpose is to regulate the international trade in conventional arms in order to prevent and eradicate the illicit trade and diversion of them. In order to accomplish this goal, the ATT requires that States Parties file both an initial report detailing measures undertaken to implement the Treaty and annual reports outlining the state’s yearly imports and exports of conventional arms.

The reports are viewed as the backbone of the ATT, providing the information alleged to be necessary to detect treaty violations and allow for them to be addressed yearly at the CSP, a conference which is funded by assessed contributions levied against those who attend, whether they are a party to the Treaty or not.

In reality, the reporting and financial requirements are treated by almost half of the ATT’s State Parties as an option and not an obligation. Last year alone, the compliance rate for required annual reports was only 54 percent, an 11 percent decrease from the previous year’s laughable amount (65 percent).

The ATT’s financial situation is even worse. Operating at an annual deficit of approximately 15 percent, and only surviving thanks to in-kind contributions, the Treaty is close to financially insolvent. While some ATT proponents make the argument that there is little cause for alarm, as 83 percent of the 2018 budget has been received, the actual makeup of who has submitted their payments shows that only 58 percent of states have actually met their obligation. This, however, is nothing new for the ATT. While 2017 noted a financial contribution high of 69 percent, the 2015/2016 numbers were roughly 64 percent. In total, the ATT is roughly $418,000 short of where it should be.  

With almost half of the Treaty’s States Parties being either unwilling or unable to comply with its most basic obligations, observing the annual CSP can cause one to run the emotional gambit between extreme disgust to outright joy. This year, on the disgust side was State Party Guatemala. Despite having never submitted a single assessed contribution, Guatemala was able to argue with a straight face that penalties should not be imposed on non-compliant states because for some, like themselves, determining who in their government should submit their assessed contribution takes time. One was left to assume this could only mean more time than the almost four years Guatemala has had to figure it out.

On the side of joy, State Party Latvia can often be relied on. This year they were one of only a handful of attendees brave enough to take the floor and address the elephant in the room, noting that not only will nothing ever be able to remedy the non-payment issue, but that 46 percent of States Parties approach the ATT like a trip to a five star restaurant, indulging in the fine dining experience only to sneak out of the room when the bill arrives.

As one pro-Treaty NGO put it, the ATT numbers are not just bad, they are abysmal. But abysmal numbers and a complete inability to meet its objective does not mean the ATT will ever go away. Instead, the inability to tackle any real global issues involving the arms trade (such as Iranian arms being smuggled to Houthi rebels in Yemen), has only led to the realization that the ATT must focus on aspects of the arms trade upon which it can have an impact, and regrettably that means civilian owned small arms and light weapons.

Under this approach, ATT proponents scored a victory at this year’s CSP. Through the use of creative language the final outcome document “welcome[ed]” several living documents into the ATT. Seemingly innocuous on its face, the incorporation of living documents which can be “reviewed and updated regularly” by one of the ATT’s four intersessional working groups creates a means by which outside initiatives and influence can be directly applied to the Treaty without requiring a vote at the CSP.

While the prospect of what these documents may become should have been alarming enough for even the most neutral State Party to object to their inclusion, what is already in them reads like the source manual for the global anti-firearm agenda, with perhaps the most concerning of all being a reference to the global farce known as the International Small Arms Control Standards (ISACS).

Falsely described as established “international standards” or “international norms” that “provide clear, practical and comprehensive guidance to practitioners and policymakers on fundamental aspects of small arms and light weapons control”, the ISACS are in reality a series of six standards developed by the UN for states to use in implementing their global disarmament agenda. Series 3 – Legislative and Regulatory – and its Module 3.30, “National Regulation of Civilian Access to Small Arms and Light Weapons,” is the most alarming of all the ISACS.

Purporting to set the standards for “National Regulation of Civilian Access to Small Arms and Light Weapons,” Module 3.30 creates a means to almost entirely limit civilian access to small arms under the guise of International Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law, and Gender Based Violence. Highlights include, but are not limited to; a ban on civilian possession of “military” style arms – no automatic weapons or magazines with over a 10 round capacity, ballistic recordings, different risk classifications on types of firearms (i.e. calibers over .45 are an intolerable risk to public safety and semi-auto handguns and rifles are high risk), licensing and registration of all firearms, training and storage restrictions, waiting periods, 20-year record retention requirements of sellers, age limits and requiring a demonstrated need to possess a firearm, with self-defense not being one of them.

While incorporation by reference of the ISACS into the ATT is alarming, it was also not entirely unpredictable.  As with every anti-firearm UN initiative, concern must never lie entirely with what is in it now, but with what it will become and how it will be used by a future U.S. administration, especially one seeking international justification for gun control agenda.

The bottom line is that despite looming financial insolvency and abysmal reporting, like all UN initiatives, the ATT will never die. Instead, it will continue to grow in both size and reach, eventually affording its proponents with enough plausibility to call for its recognition as an international norm on gun control. The time is long overdue for the United States to stop paying into the ATT and unsign it.

 

 

 

 

TRENDING NOW
Dick’s Spends Big on Gun-Chopping, Virtue-Signaling Bonanza (But It Will Still Sell You a Firearm)

News  

Sunday, October 13, 2019

Dick’s Spends Big on Gun-Chopping, Virtue-Signaling Bonanza (But It Will Still Sell You a Firearm)

Ed Stack, the CEO of Dick’s Sporting Goods, wants you to know he’s committed to keeping AR-15s “off the street.” But he’s also committed (for the time being) to selling other types of firearms.

California: Governor Newsom Signs Anti-Gun Bills into Law

Friday, October 11, 2019

California: Governor Newsom Signs Anti-Gun Bills into Law

Earlier today, Governor Newsom signed the seven anti-gun bills listed below into law.  

California: Anti-Gun and Anti-Hunting Bill Signed into Law

Monday, October 14, 2019

California: Anti-Gun and Anti-Hunting Bill Signed into Law

Prior to the October 13 deadline, Governor Newsom signed the final anti-gun and anti-hunting bills, AB 1254 and SB 172 into law.  

Number of Concealed Carry Permit Holders Increased Again

News  

Sunday, October 13, 2019

Number of Concealed Carry Permit Holders Increased Again

Last week, economist John Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center released “Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States: 2019,” his annual report on the number of concealed carry permit holders in the U.S.

Member Spotlight: Meet the Police Officer Who Told Congress She ‘Would Not Comply' with a Gun Ban

News  

Friday, October 4, 2019

Member Spotlight: Meet the Police Officer Who Told Congress She ‘Would Not Comply' with a Gun Ban

Last week, a retired Tulsa, Oklahoma law enforcement officer testified in a Congressional hearing that she “would not comply” if Congress passes a ban on firearms. Her bold assertion earned her national media attention and ...

Virginia’s Anti-gun Politicians Put Politics Before Fighting Gun Crime

News  

Sunday, October 13, 2019

Virginia’s Anti-gun Politicians Put Politics Before Fighting Gun Crime

Virginia’s anti-gun politicians are serious about attacking law-abiding gun owners, but are indifferent about actual gun crime. As highlighted in a recent report in the Washington Free Beacon by Stephen Gutowski, the Virginia Department of Justice Services ...

Kamala Harris and Her Perplexing Anti-Gun Ideas

News  

Friday, August 2, 2019

Kamala Harris and Her Perplexing Anti-Gun Ideas

U.S. Senator Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), one of the two-dozen Democrat presidential hopefuls vying to take on President Donald Trump in 2020, has been promoting her anti-gun platform for many months. This isn’t really news, as ...

Virginia Police Chief Advocates Ban on All Guns at U.S. House “Assault Weapons” Hearing

News  

Friday, September 27, 2019

Virginia Police Chief Advocates Ban on All Guns at U.S. House “Assault Weapons” Hearing

On Sept. 25, the Democrat-led U.S. House Judiciary Committee held a 3 ½ hour “hearing” entitled “Protecting America From Assault Weapons.” That framing of the issue underscored the erroneous notion that Americans need protection from ...

Grassroots Spotlight: NRA-ILA Fighting the Bloomberg Money In Virginia 2019 Elections

News  

Sunday, October 13, 2019

Grassroots Spotlight: NRA-ILA Fighting the Bloomberg Money In Virginia 2019 Elections

The Nov. 5th election may be the most consequential ever for our Second Amendment rights in the Commonwealth. That’s because every seat in the Virginia House of Delegates and Senate is up for grabs and gun control ...

Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms

Gun Laws  

Thursday, January 1, 2015

Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms

CAUTION: Federal and state firearms laws are subject to frequent change. This summary is not to be considered as legal advice or a restatement of law.

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.