"The uncontrolled trade in small arms and light weapons is a significant and growing problem to which international policymakers are devoting unprecedented attention this year," says Michael T. Klare, Professor of Peace and World Security Studies, Hampshire College. Klare believes that the delegates to this year's U.N. Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects bear a heavy responsibility in trying to "lay the foundation for a new international regime aimed at curbing the flow of arms to areas of conflict and preventing their re-use after wars have ended. Such measures -- while only part of a larger effort to reduce the level of global violence and bloodshed -- can make a significant contribution to world peace and stability."

The uncontrolled trade in small arms and light weapons is a significant and growing problem to which international policymakers are devoting unprecedented attention this year. At first glance, the illicit trade in small arms might appear relatively insignificant when compared to such dangers as the proliferation of chemical and nuclear weapons, which is, of course, an important cause for international concern. But the spread and misuse of small arms and light weapons is also a significant problem, and one that truly deserves the high degree of attention it will receive at the United Nations Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects, to be held July 9-20 in New York. To fully appreciate why this is so, it is first necessary to consider some of the changes that have taken place in the nature of armed conflict since the end of the Cold War.

For most of the 20th century, the practice of warfare typically entailed a series of armed encounters between the organized military forces of established states, usually for the purpose of territorial conquest or other clearly defined strategic objectives. The belligerents on both sides employed the full weight of their respective forces until one or the other conceded defeat. But the conflicts of the current era bear little resemblance to this model: most take place within the borders of a single state, and most entail attacks by paramilitary and irregular forces on unarmed civilians for the purpose of pillage, intimidation, and/or ethnic slaughter. Conflicts often persist for a long period of time and rarely entail a decisive, all-out battle between the various parties.

The distinctive challenges posed by the changing nature of armed conflict were first addressed in 1995 by Boutros Boutros-Ghali, then Secretary-General of the United Nations. "I wish to concentrate on what might be called 'micro-disarmament,'" he told the U.N. Security Council. By this, he explained, "I mean practical disarmament in the context of the conflicts the United Nations is actually dealing with, and of the weapons, most of them light weapons, that are actually killing people in the hundreds of thousands." Efforts to curb the spread of nuclear and chemical weapons, he insisted, "must be followed by parallel progress in conventional arms, particularly with respect to light weapons."

These comments have since been amplified and elaborated upon by many other prominent figures, including senior U.S. officials. But in these few words, Boutros-Ghali highlighted the principal cause of international concern over the uncontrolled spread of small arms: the fact that these weapons are "actually killing people in the hundreds of thousands" in the wars the United Nations (and many individual states) are "actually dealing with."

The wars that Boutros-Ghali was referring to are almost all internal conflicts -- predominantly ethnic disputes or political battles over the control of the state or the ethnic composition of particular regions or territories. Two aspects of these conflicts deserve particular mention: first, most of the victims have been civilians -- many of them women, children, or the elderly -- and second, most of the deaths and injuries have been produced by small arms and light weapons.

These two phenomena are natural expressions of the changing nature of violent conflict. Although every recent war has a distinctive history and trajectory, all exhibit some characteristics in common. In almost every case, ambitious and unscrupulous demagogues have sought to gain or retain power by creating sectarian armies composed of their ethnic or religious kinfolk. Once established, these bands are typically employed to silence opposition forces, to intimidate the local population, or to drive off members of other ethnic groups. More often than not, they are also used to generate income and other benefits for the demagogues and their loyal henchmen.

Given the nature of such conflict, it is not surprising that attacks on unarmed civilians are a routine occurrence. Although seemingly random and senseless to outside observers, violence of this sort almost always has a purpose: to exact tribute from the population, to obtain fresh military recruits (often young boys and teenagers who are enticed or coerced into combat), to destroy people's faith in the ability of the established government or a rival armed militia to protect them, to drive members of particular ethnic groups from their ancestral lands, or to exact revenge for prior acts of resistance. Whatever the case, it is the innocent and defenseless who suffer the most from these attacks.

The same set of conditions that leads to frequent attacks on civilians also leads to the pervasive use of small arms and light weapons. Most of the combatants in these conflicts are non-professional soldiers with little (if any) military training, and so must rely on simple, easy-to-use combat systems -- like the ubiquitous AK-47 assault rifle and its various copies and modifications. In most cases, moreover, the forces involved lack the funds to acquire major weapons systems, which are considerably more expensive than small arms. (A second-hand AK-47, for instance, can be acquired for $100 or less in many areas, while even the cheapest second-hand tank sells for $100,000 or more.) Small arms and light weapons can also be carried from battle to battle by an individual soldier -- a distinct advantage for forces that operate in remote and undeveloped areas with few if any roads.

The nature of the combatants in these conflicts also produces a reliance on illicit sources of weaponry. In almost every case, one or more of the warring parties is a militia or insurgent group that is excluded by law from access to the legitimate arms market. Even some of the government forces involved may be dependent on black-market sources, because the regime in question has been subjected to an international arms embargo for its failure to abide by human rights accords or U.N. Security Council resolutions. Whatever the case, the parties to these conflicts must turn to black-market dealers for access to fresh supplies of arms and ammunition.

These factors have given considerable impetus to the development of a robust, globe-spanning trade in black-market weaponry. Typically, the arms involved in this trade are obtained through theft or subterfuge from the large stockpiles of military equipment left over from the Cold War period, much of which is still in fully operational condition. These arms are then carried by ship or plane via circuitous routes to areas of conflict around the world. Although it is impossible to put a precise dollar value on the magnitude of this trade, estimates of $2-3 billion ($2,000 million to $3,000 million) per year are not considered excessive.

To pay for all of these black-market weapons, the belligerents involved often engage in illicit economic activities of one sort or another -- kidnapping, extortion, drug trafficking, prostitution, diamond and ivory smuggling, illegal logging, and so on. These endeavors often add to the trauma of war, by imposing further injuries and costs on innocent civilians, by sabotaging legitimate economic activities and, in some cases, by contributing to environmental degradation. To make matters worse, the people who engage in these illicit activities often acquire considerable personal wealth, and so perceive no reason to bring the fighting to a close. This, indeed, is one of the main reasons for the failure of U.N. peacekeeping operations in such countries as Angola, the Congo, and Sierra Leone.

Clearly, efforts to end these and other ongoing conflicts -- and to prevent additional wars of this sort from breaking out in the future -- will require strong and unstinting support from the international community. A whole range of initiatives will be needed to address the dynamics of armed conflict and its many destructive consequences. The various parties to these disputes will have to be persuaded to resolve their differences through peaceful negotiations, warring factions will have to be disarmed and demobilized, and the survivors of war will have to be provided with the wherewithal to rebuild their shattered lives. To prevent the re-ignition of combat, moreover, ex-combatants will have to be assisted in making the transition from military to civilian life.

Curbing the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons is only one part of this larger effort. Experience suggests, however, that it is a very crucial part. This is so because arms are the critical ingredient that can turn a simmering ethnic dispute into a full-scale war, or that enable a brutal warlord to dominate a particular region for years or even decades at a time. When a war is terminated, moreover, the widespread availability of surplus arms can turn a fragile peace into a condition of persistent lawlessness and banditry.

Focusing on the illicit trade in small arms is also attractive because curbing this flow is something that the international community can do in a timely, practical manner. Other steps -- persuading long-time belligerents to sit down at the bargaining table, rebuilding war-shattered economies, integrating ex-combatants into civil society, and so on -- are long, complicated processes that must be specially tailored to each individual situation. But adopting common guidelines on the export and import of arms and closing loopholes in existing arms regulations is something that can be pursued at the international level and produce an immediate, worldwide effect.

The establishment of new international controls on small arms trafficking will not fully block the flow of arms to areas of conflict or bring all wars to a close. There will always be some traffickers who will seek to elude governmental controls in the pursuit of fabulous wealth. But an effective system of controls could result in a significant reduction in the flow of arms, making it more attractive for warring parties to agree to a cease-fire and the initiation of peace negotiations. Similarly, efforts to collect and destroy surplus weapons after the successful conclusion of peace talks would reduce the risk of a fresh round of fighting or the retransfer of arms to belligerents in other conflicts.

Many of the specific measures that could be incorporated into an international control regime of this sort have already been embraced and implemented at the local and regional levels. These include: provisions for the marking of weapons and the adoption of uniform systems of export/import documentation (as provided for by the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials); close cooperation between the police and customs officials of affected countries in suppressing cross-border arms-smuggling activities (as envisioned by the Southern African Regional Police Chiefs Cooperation Organization); and the provision of training and technical assistance in modern investigative techniques by the developed nations of the North to the developing countries of the South (as called for in the European Union's Program for Preventing and Combating Illicit Trafficking in Conventional Arms).

All of these strategies, and various others, will be considered by delegates to the July 2001 conference in New York City. At this point, it is still too early to predict which of these measures will win the support of the assembled delegates, but it is likely that some among them will be incorporated into the "Program of Action" that is expected to be adopted at the conclusion of the conference. The conference will also set the stage for further action in this area, such as strengthened efforts at the regional and sub-regional level.

The delegates to the Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects bear a heavy responsibility: to lay the foundation for a new international regime aimed at curbing the flow of arms to areas of conflict and preventing their re-use after wars have ended. Such measures -- while only part of a larger effort to reduce the level of global violence and bloodshed -- can make a significant contribution to world peace and stability.

__________

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. government.

Back to top | Contents, U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda, June 2001 | IIP E-Journals | IIP Home