Thematic discussion on stockpile
management and surplus destruction
Discussion over working papers and the outcome document
introduced its discussion paper, WP.3,
which highlights challenges and outlines steps states can
take to address stockpile problems.
explained that WP.3 is organized to cover legislation, procedures,
and operations that raise awareness of national responsibility
and the need for states to renew stockpile management arrangements.
The paper also contains “basic ingredients”
for effective stockpile management systems.
Russia suggested the BMS focus on illicit trade problems
rather than explosions. While Russia agreed that managing
stockpiles and surplus of ammunition is important to prevent
ammunition from falling into the illegal trade, but argued
that WP.3 seems to focus on ammunition in general. Russia
stated paragraph 7 dealt with surplus ammunition with reference
to the PoA, but not with SALW. Regarding paragraph 1 on
ammunition explosions in depots, Russia argued such danger
comes from ammunition for heavy weapons and mines, not from
SALW ammunition.
Gabon proposed that states like Switzerland should approach
states that are in need of assistance, through the UN or
regional organizations, in order to help them better manage
their stockpiles.
welcomed the point in WP.3 that notes any international
assistance for stockpile management must emanate from requests
based on assessments made by states themselves.
agreed with WP.3 that national commitment to
improved stockpile management is essential.
The Chair noted that Part III of WP.5,
“Draft language for outcome document,” deals
with stockpile management and surplus disposal. This document
highlights the need for states to establish “effective
regulations, standards and procedures for the management
of stocks,” which requires resources and technical
assistance for multiple elements. Both WP.3 and WP.5 argue
that decision-making on stockpile management and surplus
disposal—including what percentage of their national
stockpiles are surplus—is a national prerogative,
and both argue that adequate systems and procedures are
essential to these decisions. Both also highlight the cost-effectiveness
of stockpile management.
The Latin American and Caribbean countries submitted working
document WP.9,
which argues the issue “should be approached from
the perspective of international assistance and cooperation
and national capacity-building.”
expressed support for the facilitator’s working paper.
General discussion
The European
Union argued a key problem with stockpile management
is that the PoA does not cover ammunition.
agreed ammunition should be included in work on the PoA.
Norway also noted that surplus destruction and stockpile
management will contribute to the humanitarian aspects of
the PoA.
The League of Arab States said most countries need common
legislation and technical assistance to effectively manage
their stockpiles.
CARICOM said the most important aspect of this discussion
for it is international cooperation and assistance, as the
region lacks technical, financial, and human resources to
deal with stockpile management. CARICOM argued the region
has a different perspective on the problem of stockpile
management and surplus disposal as the region does not have
large stockpiles of weapons or ammunition. CARICOM asked
states with surplus and stockpiles to manage and destroy
their weapons appropriately so that they do not enter into
illicit circulation.
highlighted the importance of following strict rules and
procedures when dealing with stockpiles, such as the “two
person rule,” which stipulates that no one person
can enter an armory alone.
urged states to share effective practices and experiences
in stockpile management and surplus disposal through bilateral
or multilateral channels and to jointly explore ways to
solve problems. China also recommended that international
technical and financial assistance and training should be
enhanced and said international organizations can help coordinate
assistance
Germany said the main problem with stockpile management
is that states do not have the technical knowledge to know
when their inventories are out of date and made several
recommendations for improved management:
states should review stockpile management practices
and request technical assistance if needed;
states should improve legislative and regulatory frameworks
that govern the safety of stockpiles;
state should pay particular attention to systematically
identifying surplus or obsolete arms;
technical guidelines for stockpile management should
be developed within UN;
education and training of management staff should
receive increased attention; and
states should strengthen their support for projects
to improve stockpile management.
recommended the development of a new international instrument
for stockpile management and destruction and argued that
awareness raising on stockpile management procedures is
key along with increasing international cooperation and
assistance. Italy also suggested states strengthen their
export controls, such as through a “no re-transfer
clause” and consider allowing exporting countries
to make regular visits to relevant deposits to ensure the
agreed arms transfer standards are met.
argued that during the arms procurement process, governments
should ensure that the terms of the transfers are determined
by their needs, not those of brokers.
said there are two approaches to combating
and preventing the illicit trade of SALW: the international
community can (and should) develop advanced instruments
to mark and trace weapons and can (and should) focus on
developing national regional legislation on brokering, while
keeping in mind that another approach is to ensure that
the source of illicit trade dries up, by ensuring stockpile
security and destroying weapons deemed useless to the legal
owner.
noted that systematic marking and tracing of weapons makes
it easier for states to make stockpile inventories.
pointed out that assistance can come in many
forms, even sharing experiences person-to-person or over
the phone.
said mechanisms to demilitarize weapons, to remove and recycle
their components is essential to surplus disposal and indicated
it needs increased technical and financial assistance in
this area.
said any approach to this issue should begin with a definition
of a “suitable” stockpile.
Senegal argued that “regularizing” sales is
not enough if stockpiles are not managed properly.
Thematic discussion on illicit
brokering
Discussion over working papers and the outcome document
said it would like the BMS to call for full implementation
of brokering agreements.
Italy called for language in the outcome document to reflect
the contribution of the Firearms Protocol toward curbing
illicit brokering.
Turkey expressed support for Italy’s request regarding
including language on the Firearms Protocol in the outcome
document.
Mexico expressed the hope that the outcome document would
establish a road map for dealing with the issue of brokering
and said it would submit a proposal to the facilitator based
on the MERCOSUR working paper.
The said it wanted references in the outcome document
made that a common understanding exists on brokering.
The also asked for an acknowledgement that states
have much to do in implementing the PoA and for emphasis
to be placed on the importance of reporting.
The 2007 report of the Group of Government Experts on
further steps to enhance international cooperation in preventing,
combating and eradicating illicit brokering in small arms
and light weapons
Brian Wood presented the major findings of the 2007 GGE,
reporting that progress had been slow since the issue was
first identified in 1996, with only 40 states having enacted
regulation of brokering. Of existing laws, he said many
were weak, describing their verification, compliance, and
enforcement as often inadequate. He said positive change
was possible with international cooperation, with sub-regional
organizations guiding the development of better legislation.
The European Union unreservedly expressed support for
the GGE’s recommendations, stating its regret that
the UN General Assembly had been unable to support it as
well.
Norway said it would have preferred stronger recommendations
from the GGE, but would nonetheless like the BMS to endorse
them.
Switzerland welcomed the recommendations of the GGE.
Russia said states should take into account the recommendations
of GGE as far as possible.
Japan encouraged all states to enact the measures recommended
in the GGE report if feasible.
The Netherlands said the recommendations made by the GGE
should be implemented with a sense of urgency.
Kenya expressed support for the GGE’s report and
recommendations.
Mexico described the GGE as the first step in a process,
urging states to arrive at an agreement with clear solutions.
India welcomed the GGE report.
General discussion
A large number of states reported on their national brokering
policies, as well as progress made in implementing the PoA,
including ,
Gabon, Belarus, Lithuania, Algeria, and India.
Kenya and Mexico reported on the operation of regional
mechanisms, in their respective sub-regions.
A number of states reported on their international assistance
programs related to combating illicit brokering, including
France, ,
and Australia.
Australia suggested ten elements for national legislation
on curbing illicit brokering.
Benin
put forward possible specific solutions on brokering, including
establish creating model legislation for presentation to
member states, assistance developing accreditation systems,
and establishing regional monitoring mechanisms.
and Japan both offered several specific suggestions for
combating illicit brokering. Japan further stated that enactment
of national legislation insufficient and that international
cooperation was needed.
said it needed assistance on legislation, enforcement, strengthening
its judicial framework.
The reiterated its offer to assist states in the
drafting of legislation on brokering.
The said addressing the issue
of brokering requires a uniform, global, legally-binding
framework—an international treaty. Pending conclusion
of an international instrument, the ICRC urged states to
establish and adhere to regional mechanism. The ICRC expressed
the view that in authorizing brokering transactions, states
must take into account the impact on international humanitarian
law.
,
CARICOM, and Colombia reiterated their support for a legally-binding
instrument to regulate arms brokering.
Discussion of other issues
The United Kingdom pointed to the adopted by the
in 2003, stating it uses elements from these
guidelines as a standard for exporting arms even to states
not participating in the Wassenaar Arrangement.
urged all states to fully comply with , which covers national, regional, and global
measures needed to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit
trade in SALW.
Panama suggested other ways to limit gun ownership, including
programs that exchange food coupons for weapons and that
educating the public on the dangers of owning a firearm.
Nigeria,
the Netherlands, and
referenced the link between the illicit trade in SALW, armed
violence, and its devastating effect on development.
Liberia highlighted the link between the illegal trade
in SALW and the illegal trade in diamonds in Africa.
The United Kingdom said self-assessment, which should
be contained in national reports, should be seen as necessary
in order to match needs to resources.
Side
Events
A SIPRI study on submission of information on SALW to
the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms Michael Spies,
In an lunchtime event, SIPRI presented the results of an assessment
of state reporting to the UN Register of Conventional Arms
in the period between 2003 and 2006. The presentation focused
on issues related to reporting on SALW since its introduction
as a “virtual category” and the merits of its
formal introduction as an eighth category. SIPRI also described
a new 12-month Counter-Illicit Trafficking Mechanism Assessment
Project, intended to assess the global movement of SALW toward
the purpose of facilitating the possible developing of information
sharing and control mechanisms.
Conflict of Interest: Children and Guns in Zones of Instability Valerie Haentjens, Reaching
Critical Will
The Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General
for Children and Armed Conflict, which is part of the United
Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, held a panel discussion
about the topic “Conflict of Interest: Children and
Guns in Zones of Instability.” Belgium organized the
meeting in order to raise awareness of the devastating effects
of small arms on children. UNIDIR introduced its research
on different aid projects and the reintegration process. A
former child soldier explained his story and showed a trailer
of a video about his case, which can be watched on www.youtube.com
under the headline “War Child Trailer-Emmanuel Jal’s
Story.”
