Group III Discussion
The meeting this morning continued its consideration of the issue of marking and tracing illicit small arms and light weapons, with speakers welcoming the report of the expert group on the subject. The 23-member expert group was established by the Secretary-General, acting on General Assembly resolution
56/24 V of 2001. The expert group recommended that a decision to negotiate, under United Nations auspices, an international instrument to identify and trace illicit arms and light weapons should be taken by the General Assembly at its fifty-eighth session. They strongly stressed the need for an internationally binding tracing and marking system, with some urging its early negotiation.
Speakers described the systems their governments had in place to trace the manufacture and transfers of those weapons. China’s representative said her Government had a stringent system, which allowed such tracing to be carried out. The representative of Canada said the experts’ report had provided a solid foundation on which countries could enhance their approach to the problem of illicit small arms and light weapons. Canada believed such an approach could move along two tracks -- increased practical cooperation between national authorities culminating in a central tracing facility and secondly, an international legal instrument.
The representative of the Republic of Korea offered that, in cases of military weapons, a six-digit marking system enabled identification and tracing of weapons.
The representative of Cuba said its views would be made known when the General Assembly took up the expert group’s report. Australia’s representative said the expert group’s report was a step forward in the search for a solution to the problem of small arms proliferation. The representative of Iran said his delegation had some questions on the expert group’s recommendations, which should be clarified when the Assembly considered the report. Brazil’s representative strongly supported the expert group’s recommendations, adding that his country favoured negotiations on tracing to begin at an early stage.
Other speakers included the representatives of the Russian Federation and South Africa.
Group IV Discussion
Colombia’s representative stressed that little had been done in the global arena to combat the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons linked to drug trafficking, transnational organized crime and terrorism. Echoing the voices of several other speakers, he noted that the illicit traffic of weapons and terrorism had common characteristics, taking advantage of globalization and the worldwide development of financial and communication networks to obtain profits. Those crimes were closely linked, and collaboration and cooperation in the international sphere was vital in defeating them.
He also noted that the majority of conflicts where small arms and light weapons were used took place in the developing world, but that most of those arms were produced in the developed world. Moreover, conflicts and terrorism occurring in the developing world were financed with money obtained from the traffic of drugs and the illicit trade of diamonds, laundered in the financial system of the developed world. The international community should demand that countries producing small arms and light weapons assume special responsibility in preventing the transfer of those weapons to criminals and terrorists, and to ensure they are not diverted to illicit commerce.
Other speakers agreed that diamonds had been used by violent groups to acquire arms which were used in the atrocities committed in Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone’s representative emphasized that international attention and cooperation was needed with respect to the links between precious minerals and the trade in small arms and light weapons. He urged nations to implement the national certification system for diamonds, particularly through the “Kimberley process”, which concerns a certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds.
Several speakers stressed the importance of implementing national small arms and light weapons controls, particularly on exports, which was crucial in preventing the proliferation of such weapons. Japan’s representative noted that the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 had taken place only one month after the Programme of Action was adopted, which delegates at the time had said made that text even more relevant. Some had urged that the Programme be made more permanent.
Delegations also noted that various international groups were working on problems related to small arms, trafficking in drugs and organized crime, and that there should be more coordination between them. Mexico’s representative pointed to deficiencies in the system for dealing with linkages of violent crime to small arms and light weapons, recommending that a more holistic approach should be applied.
Group V Discussion
The meeting next took up the question of import/export controls and illicit brokering. Speakers generally called for universal instruments to deal with the problem to prevent abuses. Others also stressed stringent application of national laws where they existed.
Italy’s representative, speaking on behalf of the European Union and its associated States, said there was a compelling need to prevent the acquisition of small arms and light weapons by terrorist groups and transnational criminal organizations. The Union believed that export authorizations should be assessed on a case-by-case basis, taking into account such factors as respect for international commitments and human rights, and compatibility of the arms exports with the technical and economic capacity of the recipient country.
The European Union had adopted a common position on arms brokering activities, with guidelines that would have to be reflected in existing or future legislation of its member States.
The Netherlands called for adequate national legislation to regulate arms brokerage, noting that currently, only 16 countries had such regulations. To facilitate the development of international action on the issue, he said it would be helpful for good practices to be identified and elements of model regulations developed. A definition of brokering and brokering activities was important. Sanctions and enforcement measures should also be considered, and increased cooperation in export control, border control and customs could be promoted.
The representative of the Russian Federation drew attention to the problem of the “re-export” of weapons because of the dangers of those falling into the wrong hands, and he called for action in that regard.
Costa Rica’s speaker urged codification of obligations of States on the illicit small arms question. States producing such weapons had a responsibility to the international community, its representative said. He put forward elements of a framework convention on the issue, including measures to be applied to weapons transfers.
Belgium’s representative said it had strengthened its criteria governing arms transfers and legislation on brokering.
The representative of China said countries should formulate measures to control arms exports and promote information exchange. It strictly enforced its arms exports, and sanctions were applied against violators. The representative of the Republic of Korea said his country upheld all of its commitments with regard to strict observance of arms exports, and called for the simultaneous examination of the issue of illicit exports and imports.
The United Kingdom’s speaker called for cooperation and technical and financial assistance to those countries that needed them. Regional approaches could be applied for effective regulation of arms exports, he said. Similarly, the representative of Canada stressed international cooperation and the provision of technical assistance. He called for political will to enforce sanctions.
Mexico’s representative said his country had committed itself to strict application of controls to guard against abuses. It had established a regime of export and transfer controls and had called for a universally applicable instrument and code of conduct on arms exports. Mali’s representative called for international assistance to deal with the issue of arms brokering.
The representative of Brazil called for multilateral approaches to international instruments on arms exports and illicit brokering, under United Nations auspices, while Finland’s speaker offered copies of its legislation on brokering.
