 |
|
| 4.8 In adopting GA resolution 54/54 V of 15 December 1999 the international community took account of the fact that with all the convulsions in global society, only one power is left that can impose order on incipient chaos: it is the power of principles transcending changing perceptions of expediency. Reducing the number of small arms requires a multisectoral and comprehensive approach, encompassing a whole range of measures, both operative and normative, which must be dealt with both within the context of conflict prevention and conflict resolution. Small arms action must address both security, humanitarian and developmental concerns. 4.9 While a systematic development of small arms control proves elusive in part due to the fact that the underlying policies vary greatly in focus and scope, there seems to be potential in pursuing this approach to small arms action. Small arms action as both a means and an end is increasingly recognized as a viable discourse for UN multilateral diplomacy within the larger context of conventional arms control. That leaves the question of how to redress the criticism of diverting from larger disarmament issues unresolved. 4.9.1 However, while our focus may be small arms, we should, nonetheless, support greater transparency and arms regulations in general, including weapons of mass destruction. This should be done by done by taking a consistent and balanced approach, especially if we are attempting to engage the international community and the United Nations. 4.9.2 The cooperative regulatory approach is essential. In the functional understanding of SACR, we need to question to what extent nonproliferation is predicated on control and to what extent SACR contributes to control and nonproliferation? It is the quest for a practical understanding of the functional interaction between nonproliferation, control and SACR that is at the core of the cooperative regulatory approach. 4.9.3 Nonproliferation interacts with corresponding small arms control. Control measures must correspond more firmly to nonproliferation because of the ripple effect arising out of national political, security and economic concerns. The logic requires a universal, comprehensive and non-discriminatory small arms control regime. Universal, comprehensive and non-discriminatory, SACR would integrate current efforts based on a variety of approaches: crime prevention, arms control, firearms regulation, human rights, development, gun safety, and others. It should, therefore, not be viewed as detracting from or interfering with ongoing, local, national or regional efforts. Rather, SACR can be said to provide a set of common standards around which these efforts can be harnessed. 4.9.4 SACR provides for a clearer definition of proliferation norms, incentives, disincentives and classification of supplier states in terms of capabilities. Calling for strong incentives against proliferation SACR could help enhance the incentives for nonproliferation. This is only possible with an international regime based on principles of transparency and universality. It could be difficult to fight off the perceived discriminatory nature were it otherwise. A linear approach to small arms action is unlikely to meet the objective of curtailing proliferation. 4.9.5 A twenty-five per cent increase in the number of producers between 1985-1995 notwithstanding a limited number of 300 manufacturers in 74 countries, with most of the significant suppliers located in industrialized countries, would attest to the efficacy of a supplier-based control regime. Moreover, the permanent members of the UN Security Council alone are responsible for 85% of the global arms trade. With 40% of the worldwide flow of small arms attributed to illicit trafficking and the majority of illicit weapons proven to originate in the licit trade, getting these governments to tighten national controls and to accept strengthened international standards for legal arms transfers should lend itself to reducing supply significantly. 4.9.6 SACR advances reciprocity under which recipient States would agree not to seek particular weapon types in exchange for suppliers agreements to specified arms control and disarmament measures, e.g. transparency in armaments, intra-regional import ceilings. Moreover, "cooperative disarmament" based on interactive measures aimed at peace and prosperity concomitant to the elimination of existent stockpiles must be advanced. 4.9.7 SACR must be viewed in the light of its applicability in the present day changing political situation and newly-emerging circumstances. Still, member States hold it to provide reasonable prospect for wider support as it adequately addresses the inseparable linked resolution of control, nonproliferation and economic development. 4.10 The objective of SACR is not only to avoid the worst, i.e. small arms proliferation but, more importantly, to achieve reductions in existent stockpiles. The international donor community is called upon to appropriate the funds necessary for a global weapons buy-back program. It must be noted, however, that the international community stands ready for practical action for as long proposals put forth are realistic and cost-effective. 4.11 SACR provides both the conceptual and programmatic impetus for burgeoning global small arms action. More importantly, it articulates a plausible and logically consistent strategy that will enable the international community to deal effectively with the demands confronting it on small arms proliferation. continued |