Preparatory Committee for the

United Nations Conference on

 The Illicit Trade in Small Arms

 And Light Weapons in All Its Aspects

16^th Meeting (AM)

SMALLS ARMS PREPARATORY COMMISSION CONCLUDES GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

ON CONTROLLING ILLICIT SMALL ARMS TRADE

The Preparatory Committee for the 2001 Small Arms Conference this morning considered, among other measures, the prosecution by States of those engaged in the illegal production of small arms and light weapons, as well as a prohibition on the transfer of those weapons to arms brokers as “end-users”, without first approving the recipients of their eventual resale.

The Committee, which is meeting until 19 January for the second of three preparatory sessions, was mandated by the General Assembly to recommend to the July Conference a draft agenda, draft objective, draft rules of procedure, including the modalities of the attendance of civil society groups, and draft final documents, which will include a programme of action that might contain a political declaration.

Members concluded consideration of the second section of the proposed draft programme of action, on preventing, controlling and curbing the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, today, and began a review of section III on international cooperation and assistance.

Addressing the second section of the text, the representative of Argentina urged the establishment of adequate national legislation to effectively control the distribution and trade in small arms and light weapons.  Regulations on the manufacture and possession of those arms, as well as the need to update arms registers, was critical to achieving greater control over trafficking.  The action plan should focus on common approaches that offered guidelines for national measures on the manufacture, acquisition, stockpiling and transfer of those arms.

Measures approved by the Conference must not interfere with, or hamper, the sovereign right of States to define appropriate levels of armaments necessary for their defence and security, the representative of Brazil asserted.  Calls for extensive information on production, stocks, holding, imports and exports of those arms might delight statisticians, but would ultimately prove cumbersome in curbing the illicit trade.  Also, the notion of facilitating cross-border operations involving weapons collection, hot pursuit, and so forth, was unacceptable to Brazil.

Like many previous speakers, the representative of Belarus said that the uniqueness of regions –- individual histories, political and social climates, and the pace of economic development –- must be emphasized in addressing the curbing of the illicit arms trade.  Attempts to standardize measures or urge their hasty acceptance, without due consideration to the uniqueness of regions, could “artificially” promote the programme of action.  Formulation of the action plan, which required a pragmatic approach, should produce a political commitment, rather than a strictly legal one.

Regarding section III, on international cooperation and assistance, the Nigerian representative said it was time to move beyond mere recognition of national and regional initiatives and craft a global action plan to facilitate their implementation, through technical and financial assistance.  Experience had shown that weapons collection and destruction was a very expensive venture.  Assistance was needed, therefore, for post-conflict disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, and for the formulation and implementation of initiatives aimed at reducing the demand for small arms.  Consideration of the needs of the most affected States should be paramount.

To the United States, assistance and cooperation were “not just words”, that country’s representative said.  Among its many initiatives, the United States had helped to build an international law enforcement academy.  It was also providing assistance for stockpile management and the destruction of surplus arms.  Along with European countries, it had participated in the destruction of some 130,000 excess weapons in Albania.  Programmes were underway in Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Europe to enhance law enforcement capacities in a way that was relevant to illicit arms trafficking.

Statements were also made by the representatives of China, Sweden, Japan, Jamaica, Canada, Gabon, Australia, Ghana, Egypt, and Lesotho and by the Permanent Observer Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations.

The Preparatory Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue its consideration of section III of the proposed draft programme of action.

Committee Work Programme

The Preparatory Committee for the United Nations Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects met this morning to continue its week-long exchange of views on the Chairman’s proposal for a draft programme of action (document A/CONF.192.PC/L.4).

The Committee is expected to conclude consideration of section II of the draft proposal, and to then move into a discussion of section III, on international cooperation and assistance. 

Continued Consideration of Preventing, Controlling and Curbing the Illicit Trade (Section II)

SANTIAGO VILLALBA (Argentina) said that as the Committee continued its deliberations on section II of the draft proposal on preventing, curbing and controlling the illicit arms trade, it was crucial to establish a programme of action that could be comprehensive.  It was very important that States adopt adequate legislation and instruments to control distribution and monitoring of the trade in light weapons.  That was closely related to the importance of keeping arms registries up to date.  There should also be State sanctions imposed on the illegal production, distribution and stockpiling of small arms.  An international network of points of contact in all regions of all countries, for a comprehensive mechanism for tracking and monitoring movement of light arms, should be established.  Registries listing small arms in civilian hands would also be helpful in controlling the flow of light arms.  It was important, also, to develop comprehensive definitions of small arms.

WU HAITAO (China), commenting on the final paragraphs of section II, said that section II needed to clarify its definition of small arms categories, particularly what were or were not considered “surplus” small arms.  There should also be more clarification of the language on transparency in the destruction of surplus weapons.  Moreover, he expressed concern about the need to bring in observers to monitor the destruction process.  Certainly, he said, States could decide on their own where, when and how weapons would be destroyed.

He went on to say that measures proposed on issues such as the national laws and regulations of States, and illicit trade routes might not be implementable.  Indeed, they might go beyond the mandate set forth by the Assembly.  This however did not preclude the necessity of States participating in an exchange of views on those issues.

ANA MARIA SAMPAIO (Brazil) said section II contained the crucial elements needed to fulfil the mandate of the Assembly and achieve the objectives of the upcoming 2001 Conference.  She felt that all paragraphs of a preambular nature could be removed from the section in order to streamline the overall draft proposal.  She also said that any use of the language of the United Nations Charter should not be paraphrased.  Such important language should be reflected exactly as it was written in that document.  It was also important that measures aimed at curbing the flow of arms should not hamper the sovereign rights of States to protect themselves or to trade or establish priorities in national programmes. 

Governments should keep records of arms stocks and supply that information upon request, she said.  Excessive flows of such sensitive information might prove undesirable from a strategic point of view and leave governments awash in numbers.  That might delight statisticians, but it would not help stem the flow of illicit arms trade.  She also noted that the idea that, where appropriate, regions would facilitate mutual assistance in cross-border operations involving weapons collection, or in “hot pursuit” of weapons, was not acceptable to Brazil.  Finally, she said that the section correctly noted that regional or subregional initiatives should be taken as appropriate.

VADIM REZNIKOV (Belarus) said that section II provided the key elements to assist the Committee in fashioning its plan of action to combat the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons.  The identification of different levels of action –- national, regional and global -- made it possible to consider the issue from a number of theoretical viewpoints.  It could, however, be excessive or destructive if such consideration digressed from the mandate of the Assembly. He was convinced that, for now, the Committee’s main efforts must focus on the struggle against the illicit trade in small arms. 

He went on to say that it was also necessary to emphasize the differences among regions, each with its own history, political and social climate and pace of economic and social development.  Efforts to standardize measures without taking different regions into account might give an artificial nature to the programme of action.  It must contain the fundamental principle that primary responsibility rested with national governments.  It must also be political and not legal in nature, or run the risk that the real concerns of States will not be taken into account.  He underscored the need for a well-balanced approach, taking into account the needs of all States.  It was important to develop an international framework for the fight against trade in small arms which drew on the expertise of, and strengthened the initiatives of, existing international institutions already addressing that issue.  It was also critical to make use of that network so as not to create new financial burdens for some States.

Consideration of International Cooperation and Assistance (Section III)

SUNE DANIELSSON (Sweden), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that it would be very useful to also include in section III the text on assistance for capacity-building, as it related to solving the small arms problem.  An element entitled “international assistance to programmes and projects” would emphasize the following points:  the importance of international assistance, such as for capacity-building in the small arms field; assurances of effective cooperation between all relevant actors within the United Nations system; and international assistance to support the process of disarmament and demobilization and the destruction of surplus weapons.  Civil society should also be mobilized to prevent and reduce destabilization effects and promote a culture of peace. 

Mr. OGUNBANWO (Nigeria) said it was time to move beyond mere recognition of national and regional initiatives to curb the illicit arms trade, and craft a global action plan which would facilitate implementation of existing and future national and regional measures, through technical and financial assistance.  The Committee should consider the views of the most affected States.  The Bamako Declaration, which set forth the common African position on the subject, contained an extensive provision on international partnerships for international cooperation and assistance.  It also issued a special appeal for enhanced cooperation to arms-supplier countries.

He said that experience had shown that weapons collection and destruction was a very expensive venture, requiring international assistance for funding and education.  The Secretary-General had provided a manual, but even with that, technical assistance on how to implement it might be required.  Assistance was also needed in the following areas:  post-conflict disarmament, demobilization and reintegration; and the formulation and implementation of initiatives aimed at reducing the demand for small arms.

MITSURO DANOWAKI (Japan) said that section III was insufficient.  That was why his delegation had presented a draft he proposed be included in that section.  The third section related to those Member States most seriously affected by the problem and in need of special assistance.  He drew attention to his proposed draft for section III, which he had circulated in the room, and which contained elements to be considered for inclusion in that section.  For example, with respect to regions and subregions emerging from conflict, the United Nations should strive to extend the integrated approach to security and development.  In doing so, due consideration should be given to the specific situation of the post-conflict region or subregion. 

In addition, the text states that in the post-conflict period, the United Nations should support all appropriate programmes related to disarmament, demobilization and reintegration, such as those on the disposal and destruction of weapons.  It should also support, with the assistance of the donor community, all appropriate post-conflict initiatives related to disarmament and demobilization.  It should consider, at the request of the State concerned, dispatching fact-finding missions to post-conflict regions and subregions where the proliferation of small arms required urgent attention.

Other initiatives urging United Nations involvement concerned information exchange, enhanced cooperation with regional organization and Member States, the development of training facilities and programmes to aid authorities in dealing with the small arms problem, and the promotion of close cooperation with all relevant organizations in the identification of the groups and individuals engaged in illicit trafficking and the modes of transfer they used.  Other aspects of the proposal concern assistance from other sources, such as interested States and the World Bank.

RAIMUND KUNZ, Observer of Switzerland to the United Nations, said that, like the European Union, he saw links between the third and fourth sections, on implementation and follow-up, respectively.  The development of robust implementation measures, as well as of an overall follow-up mechanism, should be at the centre of the Committee’s deliberations.  In particular, it was crucial to mobilize the necessary resources and expertise to assist States in implementing agreed measures.  It should be recognized that there were two distinct tasks which would become a priority after the July Conference:  the promotion of the implementation of agreed practical measures and norms; and the elaboration of an appropriate follow-up mechanism to arrange for review and further development of the action plan. 

DIANE QUARLESS (Jamaica) said section III covered a very integral part of the task before the Committee.  International cooperation was essential to stemming the flow of illicit arms.  Therefore, the scope of the problem should be reflected in the section’s recommendations.  To that end, perhaps those recommendations could be expanded, particularly as to regional cooperation.  This would focus the draft on important issues such as border control, links between legal and illegal trade, and the integral role that could be played by United Nations agencies.  She went on to say that the section could contain a greater articulation of the participation of civil society in this section of the proposal.

DENIS CHOUINARD (Canada) stressed the importance of the synergy between global and regional activity.  The impact of the small arms problem was often national or regional in scope, while its origins could be global.  Therefore, global norms and principles were crucial in reflecting the concerns of the international community, while national objectives should reflect specific regional concerns.  He reiterated that notion that global and regional cooperation were both important, but concrete measures designed to address the problem of small arms must be designed in a complimentary way.  Canada also supported the full participation of civil society.  The Committee would benefit from the expertise of non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

WU HAITAO (China) said that, to the most affected countries, section III should be considered very important since it specifically addressed their concerns as to whether the international community could promptly adopt specific measures to curb the flow in illicit arms trade.  At first glance, however, it appeared that the section lacked balance, emphasizing cooperation measures at the expense of assistance.  He hoped the Chairman would take that into account when revising the text.  By way of example, he drew the Committee’s attention to the concrete measures put forward by the Bamako Declaration in the areas of assistance and cooperation.

ALFRED MOUNGARA-MOUSSOTSI (Gabon) supported previous delegations’ calls for the Chairman to take the Bamako Declaration into account when the Committee turned to revising this section of the draft proposal.  He also thought it was absolutely necessary to support demobilization programmes, for destroying weapons and to encourage combatants to turn over weapons and return to society. States should also be given humanitarian support to deal with refugees, namely to ensure that refugee settlements were not infiltrated by groups involved in the trade in illicit arms and light weapons.

Mr. STEPHENS (Australia) said that adequate cooperation and assistance measures would be essential for States to address arms control issue in a pragmatic way.  He also added his support to other delegations’ calls for including the objectives and recommendations outlined in the Bamako Declaration in the Committee’s deliberations.  Capacity-building measures and best practice models also deserved recognition in section III.  It was very important to consider efforts to improve cooperation between police and border control officials.  It went without saying that civil society should enjoy the broadest possible participation.  If, in section III, the Committee wished to address all efforts aimed at ensuring cooperation and assistance, it might be more beneficial to take a broad approach at this time.  He added that section III should necessarily develop and evolve in tandem with sections II and IV.   

ELIZABETH VERVILLE (United States) said that, for her country, assistance and cooperation in efforts to curb the illicit arms trade were not just words. The United States had provided support to African countries and regional organizations to enhance law enforcement capabilities, fire arms regulation, border controls, stockpile management and weapons destruction.  It had also assisted many countries in south eastern Europe, Asia and the Caribbean to enhance their law enforcement capacities. 

She said her delegation agreed with the general thrust of the language in section III, particularly, among other recommendations, the broad participation of civil society.  This section, however, contained language which appeared to connote certain legal obligations, and it was important for the Committee to be aware that its task was not to develop a treaty.  References to “global norms and principles” were slightly confusing and she hoped that terminology did not refer to measures that had been elaborated in other sections of the document.  She also said that the Committee should not look to burden intergovernmental organizations such as Interpol with tasks outside the scope of their normal operations.  Finally, the section appeared to be missing reference to the private sector, namely weapons producers and manufacturers, which had an important contribution to make, particularly in the area of marking and record keeping.

YAW OSEI (Ghana) said any agenda for cooperation and assistance should contain norms for regional and subregional participation.  Cooperation through initiatives advanced by intergovernmental organizations, such as Interpol, was crucial.  Indeed, that particular organization had already proved its capacity to enhance international and regional efforts to stem the trade in illegal firearms.  The Committee should be aware that the capacity of intergovernmental organizations could be further enhanced by the establishment of coordinating bodies.  Those coordinating agencies could incorporate the expertise of police forces as well as improve regional information exchange capabilities.  The participation of civil society organizations was also critical, he added.  Long-term strategies involving education and socio-economic programmes would be needed to change the culture of violence in many regions of the world.  Paragraphs of section III should be broadened to highlight that fact.

ISMAIL KHAIRAT (Egypt) said the title of the section did not exhaust the many issues that demanded consideration.  Most notably, the part on global norms and principles was ambiguous and contained language that needed clarification.  The Bamako Declaration could be useful in that regard.  He believed that some

paragraphs had placed States and NGOs on an equal plane when addressing the issue on small arms.

PHAKISO MOCHOCHOKO (Lesotho) said, for African countries -- those most affected by the illicit arms trade -- section III was the most important section of the proposed draft.  It should therefore be the least controversial and enjoy the widest possible support.  The necessary ingredients were present within the Bamako Declaration to fashion a comprehensive strategy on cooperation and assistance.

At the close of the Committee’s discussion this afternoon the Chairman noted the interest some delegations had shown in scheduling briefings, on aspects of the illicit arms trade, by relevant United Nations agencies funds and programmes.  He acknowledged that such briefings would prove helpful in guiding the Committee’s work.  He said he would discuss the idea with the Secretariat and possibly include a day for such briefings in the work programme for next week.

* *** *