UNITED NATIONS - With 1.3 trillion dollars spent every year on the world's militaries, countries enmeshed in conflict are often flooded by weapons which are then turned against helpless civilian populations, say human rights organisations pushing for an international treaty to closely regulate arms sales.
"If a country is likely to be involved in warfare, then it is unjustifiable to sell arms. There must be regulation or control of arms -- especially when the countries that are buying them are involved in a conflict," Valentino Deng told IPS in an interview.
Deng's experiences formed the basis of Dave Eggers's recent novel "What is the What", which fictionalises the story of his life as a refugee of the Sudanese civil war. When Deng's village was attacked and burnt down, he was separated from his family and fled on foot with a group of other young boys. On the journey to a refugee camp in Kenya, they encountered great danger and terrible hardships.
"I saw people being killed by aerial bombings and I saw villages burnt to ashes," he told IPS. "I witnessed one of the incidents when a mother was killed and her young child was trying to breastfeed on the dead mother. At that time, I was wondering about one thing: who was supplying all these arms for war and conflict?"
The U.N. peacekeeping force's former commander in the Democratic Republic of Congo, General Patrick Cammaert, saw firsthand the futility of disarmament without controlling the supply of arms at the same time. "You had the feeling," he said last year, "that you were mopping up the floor when the tap was open. One moment you disarm a group, and then a week later the same group has fresh arms and ammunition."
A new report by Oxfam International reveals how irresponsible arms transfers undermine many developing countries' chances of achieveing their development goals. Either these transfers are draining the governments' resources or fuelling armed conflict, or both.
The international arms trade is also considered to be one of the three most corrupt businesses in the world, according to Transparency International, the leading global organisation monitoring corruption.
"What is clear is that if you want to achieve the development goals, with poverty reduction, improved health care and education, you need to control arms transfers, " said Katherine Nightingale, author of the Oxfam report.
At least 22 of the 34 countries least likely to achieve the U.N.'s Millennium Development Goals are in the midst of, or emerging from conflict, according to U.N. statistics. Oxfam notes that between 1990 and 2005, 23 African countries together lost an estimated 284 billion dollars as a result of armed conflicts, fuelled by transfers of ammunition and arms -- 95 percent of which came from outside Africa.
An investigative report by Amnesty International last month found that clandestine gun suppliers, funded by the U.S. and Iraqi governments, have flooded Iraq with a million weapons since 2003.
Because of faulty or non-existent government tracking systems, many of those guns have gone missing, and some have turned up in the hands of insurgents, Amnesty said.
According to the Oxfam report, a comprehensive and effective international arms trade treaty must be agreed to ensure more responsibility and transparency. Existing international initiatives like the Geneva Declaration to address armed violence are simply insufficient, it says.
"In parts of Africa there are strong regional agreements. But this is not enough. Arms trade is a global industry. We want a global arms trade treaty to ensure that states are hold accountable for the processes of procuring arms. International regulations are far behind in this aspect, " Nightingale told IPS.
Worldwide support for a global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) was reflected when 153 states voted in favour during the United Nations General Assembly in December 2006. And later this month, U.N. member states will meet again to consider further steps to move towards negotiations on an ATT.
In the run-up to these discussions, a few states, including China, India, Egypt, Pakistan, Russia and the United States, have been attempting to block, delay and water down proposals, advocates say. This could kill the treaty before real negotiations even begin and allow continued unchecked trade in arms, human rights organisations fear.
Amnesty International, Oxfam, and others are now calling for the General Assembly to start a negotiating process during 2009 so that the international community can benefit from a legally-binding and universal Arms Trade Treaty by the end of 2010.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
24 Comments so far
Show AllI have some sympathy for the gun freaks here. Guns are inanimate objects. Someone out there formed the intent to do something bad, and the guns are the most effective way to do it. Machetes worked fine in Rwanda. The problem is not the guns and machetes.
People buy weapons because they need them. They need them because they feel threatened by the neighbours next door. The neigbours next door need them to threaten everyone else effectively.
The real problem is the management of conflict. We should not start them. We should not encourage the participants. We should consider that however correct someone's cause is, it is very likely not as serious as the damage being done by the fighting.
If the need for the weapons disappears, the market will disappear, along with the weapons.
JHG
The need for weapons will disappear when man is perfected to no longer be violent.
For 75 years, Soviet Communism tried to create a "perfected" man. 50 million odd dead later, they failed. Man is not, and never will be perfect. Assholes will continue to walk the Earth for as long as the human race exists. In some countries, at some times, they will take over the government. To take away a citizen's right to defend himself from thugs and assholes is a crime against humanity.
Where was the photograph taken that illustrated this article? The weapons look like something out of Stembridge Gun Rentals, the company that supplies guns to the movies --- I can identify four MP-40s, a Beretta 38, and several Tommy Guns down the line. In other words, antiques dating back to WWII.
And it might be well to remind everyone that the single most commonly-used firearm in the world is the AK-47, which is not American-made. Upwards of 100 MILLION of them have been manufactured in several countries over about 60 years' time, and they never wear out.
Oh, and BTW, Wilderman, please don't forget that in most US states, one CAN own a fully-automatic weapon or a selective-fire weapon --- but only if one can pass an exceedingly stringent federal background check (including providing a passport photo and fingerprints), pay a $250 transfer tax to the BATFE, and afford the horrendously high prices to buy one ($5,000 and up). It's not worth it to a poor shlep like me, of course.
US Trade Balance:
Food +$$$
Consumer goods -$$$
Oil -$$$$$$
Autos -$$$
Almost anything else manufactured -$$$$$
Illegal Drugs -$$
Aircraft +$
Weapons +$$$$$$$!
Keep up the good work! Don't take No for an answer!
US Sovereignty is at stake!
Continued...
Third, to really show how stupid this article is, read some of the articles about gangs in America. Some of our gangs have fully automatic rifles. Where did they get them? In these articles, we do just the opposite of this article, we blame MEXICO gang members for importing them from Mexico, Venzuala, etc. So one anti-gun camp says the guns are coming from Mexico. And another anti-gun group says they are coming from the US. Get your story straight.
And the straight story is that these guns come from all over. Many of the Machine guns in the US are Russian made. Some are Chinese made. Some are American made. When you create laws, you raise the prices in the black market. Higher demand = higher supply. So now it more profitable to sell these illegal guns. And so Russian arms dealers get in the game. China arms dealers get in the game. And even your own government supported arms dealers gets in the game. The guns in that case get laundered (just like money) and first go some other country 'legal sales' with the intent of coming immediately back under cover of the black market.
And so you are proposing laws that your government and their corporate buddy gun companies are actually making a profit from. You have heard the story about the foxes guarding the hen house. Well, by making gun laws, you are handing the keys of the hen house to the foxes.
The ONLY thing that will stop gun sales is an extreme dictatorship. Like Hitler did. And the only alternative is for every citizen to own their own and take responsibility for their own protection (like Switzerland with nearly zero crime) instead of being a pansy and expecting someone to take care of you.
This country is about being INDEPENDENT.
Think about that.
When everyone in your neighborhood owns a gun and is not afraid to use it, and a crook breaks into your neighbors house up the street, and everyone takes pot shots at him as he tries to run away, how long before crime drops?
But no, you pansies do not want to pull the trigger the same as you could never take responsibility for taking the life and butchering the meat you buy at the supermarket.
Life is not perfect. When you eat something good, you soon have to shit. It is a consequence of life. Learn to live with the realities of it. Shit is nasty stuff, we should make it illegal. Right? This is gets to the heart of what we call bambi syndrome and being pansy ass. When you cannot accept the realities of life and start flapping your lips to support those who want to control you by taking away your guns, you are just causing more hell in this world. Like Nazi Germany, when you support the taking away of guns, you are supporting dictatorship.
"We have all the laws on the books against illegal immigration. And where are we with that?"
Making progress, thank God.
"when you support the taking away of guns, you are supporting dictatorship."
Absolutely correct.
What about an AR15 with a 40 round clip? There are more than just a few rounds available for semi-autos.
40 round clips are illegal in California.
That is why there are no drive by shootings anymore, I guess...The gang bangers would not dream of using an illegal mag.
Continued...
Secondly. Besides that fact that automatic or machine guns are not available in the US except in the black market. The black market does not obey the laws now. They will NEVER obey the laws. The black market of guns is analogous to illegal immigration. You cannot stop it. We have all the laws on the books against illegal immigration. And where are we with that?
And so this article is nothing but propoganda. A real issue in Mexico USED to try to turn public sentiment against gun ownership in America. The real way to fight the issue in Mexico is to take military action against the black market who have and will always sell illegal guns regardless of any of the laws on the books. Together with what one of the other posters here mentioned, by making gun ownership in Mexico legal, would make this fully their issue and not ours.
Don't tread on me.
This article is just propoganda to stir up dissent against the right to keep and bear arms.
One, Automatic firearms are already controlled in the US. Let me state it this way, they are illegal. Entirely illegal. You can't walk into any store in the US and buy one. And if the law here does not stop fully auto guns now, what will more laws do? Waste tax payers money and keep legislators working on moot issues instead of the economy, etc.
Now, we also have guns called semi-auto.
Let me tell you the difference. Fully automatic guns (also called machine guns) fire extremely rapidly. You pull the trigger once and the gun continuously fires bullet after bullet. Ten or more rounds per second. Some hitech military will fire hundreds of rounds per second. Some of these guns hold hundreds of rounds of bullets.
Semi-auto is best defined as "auto loading". You pull the trigger and the gun fires once. The gun reloads itself so you can take aim and pull the trigger again. But it is a single shot 'one at a time' gun. In addition, in the US, while you can purchase semi-auto, they are limited in how many rounds they will hold. A typical hunting rifle or shotgun is limited to 5 shots and in most states, there are additional limits placed on ownership by the state. In Washington State, your hunting rifle can only hold 3 rounds or bullets.
see next post.
You are right. Our government should be doing something about this problem.
Two things, rather.
First, we should legalize drugs in the United States. All prohibition does is enrich thugs. Bankrupt drug gangs will have no money for weapons.
Second, we should push Mexico to adopt something similar to the second ammendment to their constitution. If law abiding citizens could purchase guns in Mexico, they would not need to smuggle them in from the USA. An added benefit is that crime and kidnapping would probably go down; I find it impossible to believe that it could get worse.
Not all, but legalize most. I can't argue with that. Grass first up, its stupid to make that illegal but alcohol is OK...DUH!
I'd agree with #2 certainly. An armed populace changes the game.
Forget waiting for the UN. Our government should be doing something about all the arms going across the border to Mexico.
This is a serious problem thats getting worse and killing people on both sides of the border.
Where is the outcry here? You hear nothing. Its shameful.
What are you asking for, gun control? Not gonna happen. The NRA owns the voters on both sides lock stock and barrel.
Gun control? Of course not. But stringent penalties on these smugglers. Regain control of our border sooner than it will happen at the snails pace set by Bush and his cheap labor boys. They don't want to give up their slaves.
Ahh, thanks. I think this country's too late on border control. There are more illegalized immigrants dumped these days in South Carolina. Add to it, even Pat Buchanan can't stomach the fact that North Carolina has the highest growth in hispanic populations so soon so fast. No group can breed so fast. We need to shut down the NAFTA Superhighway and bring our troops home from Iraq to put on the borders. Every country knows that homeland security is a joke.
P.S.: I hear a lot about the broken borders in CA and AZ. What about NM and TX? Someone told me that the Rio Grande is drying up faster these days.
Texas is pretty much open, but many illegals are heading home because of the economy. That will surely help with the crimes because the criminals hid in the illegal community.
A further reply to your comment:
Tell me, do you believe that, IF Mexico tomorrow managed to stop ALL drugs flowing across its territory, the drug supply would dramatically change in the United States? Of course not, the drug demand would be fulfilled through some other country.
And vice versa. If a fascist regime in the US managed to completely erradicate civilian gun ownership in America, do you really believe that the multi billionaire Mexican drug lords, whom we have created, would have any difficulty finding guns elsewhere?
Furthermore, recent attacks on the military in Mexico have involved fragmentation grenades and military caliber machine guns, neither of which were bought in American gun shops.
Lets see......
No I don't think it would stop all supplies of drugs to the US. But it would help.
No one is going to eradicate private gun ownershipm in America nor should they. They might find guns elsewhere, but its lower level folks thaty are doing this mainly.
Frags and machine guns did not come from the US? Of course they did. You should see the arsenal thats been confiscated. You could start a small war with it. Little of this stuff is bought in gun shops in any case.
I don't really see your point. Are you saying we should let this continue till it blows up in every city in the US? Not just the border states? Do nothing? Let me stress the serious nature of this problem. And its getting worse.
My point is that Mexico does not really have a gun problem, it has an incredibly rich drug-thug problem. It sounds like you are NOT calling for gun control in the US; I misunderstood your point of view their in your original post. So, this is not a criticism of you. BUT, even if you sealed the border tomorrow, the Mexican gangs would still arm themselves. Billionaires can do that...My take on this "The US is arming Mexican drug lords" is that it is just another call for gun control in the USA.
I disagree with your take on the frag grenades. Most of them are coming out of the back door of Mexican Army arms vaults. They are not something you can just buy at the corner store in the USA.
"So, this is not a criticism of you"
Didn't think it was.
"My take on this "The US is arming Mexican drug lords" is that it is just another call for gun control in the USA."
Got it. Now I understand. I was just thinking of the problem here on the border in Texas and all the way from here to California. Its getting worse.
I'm sure they would still arm themselves just ass the drugs would still flow. But we need to make a start. I just want to stop waiting for someone else to do something. And one of the problems is that now the Mexican gangs are operating on our side of the border.
As to the frags, I wouldn't doubt it for a moment, but they get them here too, THP has seized cases of them, M-60's, you name it.
Every problem you state is real. We could solve ALL of them if the US legalized personal consumption of drugs, and Mexico legalized personal possession of firearms.
I'm not sure that'll go very far to curb the problems though I'd support it. In the long run, we'd be better off cancelling NAFTA and bringing the troops home from Iraq to put on the borders for what it's worth. And while at it, time to get our economic sanity back. It's time to ditch corporate socialism and RIGGED "capitalism". A really capitalistic society would never allow any person or entity whatsoever to be bailed out, not even Wall $treet.
"we'd be better off cancelling NAFTA and bringing the troops home from Iraq"
Lets just do that too....can't hurt.
Works for me. Except pure cocaine and heroin.