|
Day
9: Facilitator's Summaries and Chair's draft paper released
22 July 2010
by Ray Acheson, Reaching Critical Will of the Women’s
International League for Peace and Freedom
On Thursday morning, the ATT PrepCom received summaries from
the three facilitators who coordinated discussions on scope,
parameters,
and implementation
of the Treaty. The PrepCom also received the Chair’s
Draft Paper on elements, principles, and objectives. A
short discussion followed the release of these texts, with
a few delegations making general or specific comments on the
drafts. All of the reports and papers are essentially compilations
of views expressed over the past two weeks. None of the texts
strive for a middle ground, but rather, provide a list of
possible ingredients that will have to be further refined
during the course of the remaining ATT PrepComs and negotiating
conference. All of the facilitators and the Chair repeatedly
expressed that these texts do not serve to “prejudge”
negotiations.
Scope
The Facilitator’s
Summary on Scope provides an overview of states opinions
on what types of weapons and activities should be covered
by an ATT. Among other things, it notes that most states consider
the UN Register of Conventional Arms to be a good starting
point, though many believe the Treaty would need to include
an annex of other weapon systems, or broader definitions of
the UN Register categories and the inclusion of other categories/related
items. The summary notes that disagreements over the inclusion
of ammunition still remain.
It also highlights that while a range of activities and transactions
were suggested by states, most delegations called for definitions
for these transactions and activities. A range of definitions
were suggested, drawing on existing international definitions.
Some states, the report noted, also want an “exceptions”
section in Treaty, which would include internal transfers,
national ownership of weapons, sporting and hunting rifles
for recreational purposes, and antique weapons.
Parameters
The Facilitator’s
Summary on Parameters highlighted some key points of discussion,
including: the need for objective and non-discriminatory criteria;
implementation of parameters as a state responsibility and
the potential for higher national standards; and transparency,
consistency, and predictability in the application of parameters.
The summary also covers suggested methodologies for applying
criteria, including how to assess whether the proposed arms
transfer would be necessary, such as risk of adverse impact,
patterns of violation, etc. The discussion also covered possible
language for degrees of risk, whether reasons for denial should
be provided, and whether guidelines could assist states in
interpreting and applying the agreed criteria consistently.
The report also includes possible specific criteria that
were suggested by states, such as, inter alia, consideration
of international legal obligations; potential consequences;
potential risk of diversion of arms; potential use of arms
to violate international humanitarian or human rights law;
consistency of the transfer with existing agreements; potential
impact on the receiving state’s disarmament and non-proliferation
obligations, sustainable economic and social development,
and potential contribution to the displacement of people;
the defence and security needs of the receiving state, keeping
in mind the principle of the least diversion for armaments
of human and economic resources, and considering levels of
stockpiles and stockpile management; transparency; and proliferation
record and risk of corruption.
Implementation
The Facilitator’s
Summary on Implementation and Application notes that preferences
ranged from a Treaty that should be implemented solely at
the national discretion of its members and one that should
impose national obligations but rely on an international body
to assist in implementation, enforcement, verification, monitoring,
and application. The summary report covers a wide variety
of perspectives on national obligations (both principles and
practical measures), transparency measures, international
mechanisms and other measures, and added value and incentives
for universality.
After the facilitators introduced their summaries, a few
delegations proposed additions or corrections. For the most
part, delegations supported the texts and called for states
to strive to reach a middle ground in future discussions.
Chair’s Draft Paper on elements, principles,
and objectives
Like, the facilitator’s summaries, the Chair’s
draft paper takes into account a wide range of proposals.
The Chair emphasized that all three sections of his paper
are an indicative and that nothing is to prevent the PrepCom
from including other items that may not have been identified
or defined at present.
The elements section of the paper provides a sketch of the
possible sections for an ATT, from preambles and definitions
to implementation and follow-up. It includes 14 sections and
many more subsections.
The principles section is written as a possible preamble
of the Treaty and includes elements citing the UN Charter,
the adverse effects of the illicit and unregulated arms trade,
rights of states, needs and gaps that an ATT could fill, etc.
It is a compilation of suggestions states have made since
the beginning of this PrepCom.
The goals and objectives section includes items such as establishing
the highest possible common international standards for the
import, export, and transfer of conventional arms; preventing
and eradicating the illicit trade in conventional arms; preventing
international transfers of conventional arms in a variety
of circumstances; contributing to international and regional
peace, security, and stability; promoting transparency and
accountability; creating controls to prevent diversion to
illicit markets and unauthorized users; and promoting the
goals and objectives of the UN Charter.
After the Chair introduced his paper, a few delegations made
comments. For example, Pakistan’s delegate cautioned
that the assertion that dealings between member states are
of a suspect nature needs to be avoided. He also reiterated
that while the PrepCom will hopefully be able to agree on
commonly agreed criteria to guide decisions of states, in
case of disputes or objection, there has to be some standard
to refer to. Mexico’s delegation called for the draft
paper to include criminalization of importer violations and
reference to the establishment of an international body. Egypt’s
delegate expressed caution about the inclusion of human rights
in the document, arguing that some counties that promote human
rights in this context ignore it in the nuclear disarmament
context, suggesting there is perhaps a hidden agenda when
it comes to the ATT.
What’s next
The PrepCom is not meeting Thursday afternoon; the Chair will
hold consultations with delegations to discuss the summaries
and his draft paper. Tomorrow morning, he hopes to wrap up
this first session of the PrepCom by noon.
777 UN Plaza - 6th Floor - New York, NY - 10017 - Ph: 212.682.1265 - Fax: 212.286.8211 - info@reachingcriticalwill.org
This site was created by Kache
Productions ©2008
| 
