Chapter 5Making the Moratorium a RealityThe Wassenaar Arrangement and West Africa’s MoratoriumWith the end of the Cold War, confrontation between the East and West was replaced by a more diffused set of security concerns. The spread of weapons of mass destruction and the proliferation of sophisticated conventional arms and sensitive technologies to regions of instability belong to such new trans-national challenges. The demand for weapons and respective know-how unfortunately remains high in several areas of the world. At the same time, weapons of concern became more accessible after removal of the Cold War barriers and restrictions. The explosion of trade and technology transfers in the 1990s has produced a new global economy in which people, ideas, and capital interact more quickly and more easily than before. That is why concerns regarding the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, advanced conventional weapons and sensitive technologies have emerged at the top of the international political agenda in recent years. Great attention has been paid to improving already existing networks of treaties, transparency measures and export control systems and to introducing additional multilateral efforts to address questions of proliferation. Developments in Asia, Africa and Europe have tragically underlined the urgency of these efforts. The Wassenaar Arrangement is one of these efforts. It is the first truly multilateral agreement since the end of the Cold War covering export control on both conventional weapons and sensitive dual-use goods and technologies. This 33 country arrangement is named after the Dutch town of Wassenaar, a suburb close to the Hague. With the Gulf War still on the minds of many participants, agreement was reached there in 1995 to start a new type of multilateral co-operation to prevent the destabilising accumulation of arms and sensitive technologies by the establishment of a process of transparency and consultation and by promoting greater responsibility in transfers of the controlled items. The participating states include: Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Argentina, the United States, Canada, and the whole of Europe including Russia and Turkey. Thus, there is a broad geographical basis for the Arrangement. Among the participating states are found major arms producers and exporters, in all about 80 to 85 percent of world trade in arms. Some major producers, however, are not there, yet. Vigilance through export control is necessary because many of the materials and technologies that have legitimate peaceful applications can also be used in the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction or more conventional arms. Moreover, part of the commitment undertaken by Wassenaar members also entails controlling trade in conventional weapons transfers in order to ensure that the objectives of the Arrangement are carried out. The Wassenaar Arrangement is not another formal international organisation, but rather a forum of like-minded countries. Members use it as a venue to exchange information and share concerns in the area of export controls with the objective of preventing accumulations of military capacity where they would threaten regional and international security and stability. Participants commit themselves to carry out effective controls at the national level on transfers of conventional arms and dual-use technology, to exchange information confidentially on transfers of controlled items to non-members and to report on denials of licenses. They furthermore exchange information on worrisome military build-ups and other threats to security in various regions of the world. The reporting of denials helps us to bring to the attention of partners transfers that may be destructive. Frankness in exchanging such sensitive information can help in eliminating inadvertent competition and corruption and thereby foster national export policies more compatible with each other’s security concerns. The Arrangement’s information exchange requirement involves notifications of arms transfers to third countries and currently covers the seven categories in the UN register of conventional arms. However, this information is provided more frequently and includes more details than requested in the UN system. Participants meet regularly in Vienna and, on the basis of information exchanged on international dual-use and arms transfers, discuss risks associated with potentially destabilising acquisitions of armaments. Through transparency and consultation, suppliers of arms and dual-use items can develop a common understanding of the risks associated with their transfer and better assess the scope for co-ordinating national control policies to combat these risks. Information exchange, persuasion by partners, and reasoned discussion among responsible countries are its essential characteristics. When the Wassenaar Arrangement was being negotiated in 1994-95, problems arising from the proliferation of illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons were not the foremost post-Cold War security concern on the minds of the negotiators. However, consciousness among the Wassenaar membership of the problems of insecurity due to unwanted proliferation of light weapons has been enhanced recently by the work of those associated with this conference. In particular, the efforts of West African states involved with Mali’s initiative to tackle the demand side of the problem have been important in getting its attention. The Arrangement took note of the initiative to establish a West African Moratorium proposed in the Bamako Conference of November 1996. A representative of the Chair was sent to the follow-up conference in Bamako in March 1997, the first anniversary of la Flamme de la paix. Following our report of the initiative, we discussed the matter in several meetings. A number our participating states pointed out the importance of such an initiative in countries that have suffered from the dangerous proliferation of small arms. Further briefings by representatives of Mali and other officials involved in this effort in several of the Wassenaar capitals were instrumental in developing sympathy and support for the Moratorium initiative. In our December 1997 Plenary, representatives of the 33 countries participating in the Wassenaar Arrangement joined a consensus to welcome and encourage publicly the Moratorium development. Participating states promptly responded to the formal declaration of the Moratorium by ECOWAS in October of last year by welcoming it in their December 1998 Plenary public statement. They also announced their intention to undertake an appropriate collaborative role with ECOWAS member states to respect the provisions of the Moratorium and to be open to providing advisory and/or technical assistance in its implementation. Such collaboration will probably primarily be bilateral between the individual Wassenaar country and ECOWAS members rather than involve the Wassenaar Arrangement directly. Nevertheless, there has been and should remain a Wassenaar dimension that supplements bilateral contacts and developments. Following the Wassenaar Arrangement’s December Plenary, ECOWAS Moratorium officials met in Vienna again in January of this year to inform the head of the Wassenaar Secretariat and a number of representatives from Wassenaar countries. A representative was again sent to the March Ministerial Meeting in Bamako that launched the PCASED programme. These contacts help keep the ECOWAS effort on our agenda. National experts may be best equipped to determine how the Wassenaar countries could contribute in practical terms to the implementation of the Moratorium. Our representatives have already recommended that ECOWAS send a formal note to the Wassenaar in Vienna for further distribution to member states or via diplomatic note to the capitals of the 33 countries notifying of entry into force of the Moratorium and requesting countries to comply with it in their export control policies. The final communiqué from the last Bamako Ministerial instructed the ECOWAS Secretariat to take action with respect to this notification. Since export control authorities must provide clear and specific guidelines and regulations, the ECOWAS notification to Wassenaar or Wassenaar countries could usefully provide detailed information on the categories and technical parameters of weapons covered by the Moratorium. In this context, the Wassenaar Secretariat could, if asked, give useful technical support. It would also help for the Wassenaar membership to know of any provisions relating to exceptions and notification of exceptions. The intention of ECOWAS countries to adopt a code of conduct for application of the Moratorium, which contains useful recommendations on moving ahead, is also a welcome development. The Moratorium will be on the agenda for the next meeting of the General Working Group of the Wassenaar meeting in May and Wassenaar countries should discuss then what measures they could take in their export control regulations and policies to ensure compliance. I will also recommend that when Wassenaar countries contact non-Wassenaar arms supplier countries, we express our support for the Moratorium and also encourage them to conduct a responsible export control policy. The suggested plan of PCASED activities includes, among other priorities, the objective of ‘facilitating dialogue with producers and suppliers.’ Contacts between the Wassenaar, PCASED and Moratorium secretariats could be an aspect of this dialogue and could become a way of delivering messages and reports more broadly to the membership of the Wassenaar. Such a dialogue could enhance the information exchange we already have within Wassenaar. In the future, it might be useful for both ECOWAS Moratorium and Wassenaar experts to discuss experiences under the Moratorium, perhaps leading to further specification of the small arms and light weapons covered by whatever measures follow-up the current three-year Moratorium. In conclusion, while security concerns caused by small arms were not foremost on our minds when the Wassenaar Arrangement was established, our participants recognise that our commitment to responsible transfers and effective export controls does not exclude small arms and light weapons. As responsible suppliers, we must be responsive to the security concerns posed by small arms and make sure that any lapses in the effectiveness of our export controls do not result in our contributing to an excess evasion of the programme. In our Wassenaar work we have looked at other areas of the world where the proliferation of weapons contributes to the instability. The Great Lakes region of Central Africa and Afghanistan are examples. We take these problems seriously and together are working to strengthen our commitment to responsible export control on these items. Our objective is to contribute to peace and security in a safer world and the commitment of our 33 participating countries will complement and make more effective efforts like this important West African initiative. The Regional Implementation Mechanism for the West African Moratorium: Programme for Co-ordination and Assistance for Security and Development (PCASED)The West African Moratorium and its implementing mechanism, PCASED, are initiatives that came about as a practical experiment in West Africa accruing from our many efforts in search of peace and security. In 1994, when the United Nations conducted a fact-findingmission on the flow of small arms in West Africa, we never thought that we would come this far. But we have come this far because this initiative is one arising from a real need of the people; people who have taken stock of the many previous efforts, many of which did not work, and who have invested in peace and security. They have decided to follow this very bold proposal of President Konaré of Mali, which calls upon West African States to abstain from importing, exporting and manufacturing light weapons for a renewable period of three years. PCASED, the Programme for Co-ordination and Assistance for Security for Development, is a regional project of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) which operates in the framework of the UN Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa. It aims at supporting ECOWAS member states in the implementation of the Moratorium on the Importation, Exportation and Manufacture of Small Arms and Light Weapons. It must be emphasised that PCASED is not, and will not be, the only implementing mechanism. Much of the burden will lie on the member states themselves. Member states of ECOWAS will have to continue translating into concrete reality the political will that they demonstrated in signing the Moratorium in Abuja in October 1998.PCASED will rely on the efforts of the member states at the national level through the national commissions, which are now being set up in many of the countries. PCASED will also have to work with civil society organisations both inside and outside the region in order for it to respond to the challenge of implementing the objectives of the Moratorium. The Norwegian Initiative on Small Arms Transfers (NISAT) is just one of those elements of civil society outside the region, which for almost two years now has been working very hard with us. Another pillar of the implementation effort is an advisory group, which is made up of experts from both within and outside of the region who participate in their individual capacities. Their role is to advise the director at a substantive and technical level on the management of PCASED and the various ways, in which PCASED will implement its activities. In the beginning, many were sceptical about workability of the concept of the Moratorium and its implementing mechanism because most of the weapons proliferating in the region were coming from outside of it. The organisers thus realised early on that the initiation of a dialogue with the arms producing and supplying countries was essential for the Moratorium regime to be effective. This dialogue is an important dimension in the implementation effort and we will continue working with the Wassenaar Arrangement in particular. It is also hoped that some of the more complex technical aspects for which we do not have the expertise can be facilitated by assistance from the Wassenaar Arrangement. PCASED is a multidisciplinary structure in terms of the programmes it is to implement. For this reason, a number of departments and agencies within the United Nations system, such as the Department of Political Affairs, the Department for Disarmament Affairs, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, the UNDP itself, the United Nations Office for Project Services, the Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs and, of course, the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research will be bringing their inputs to the project. These inputs will be articulated by the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa. In March 1999, the ministers of foreign affairs of ECOWAS adopted a plan of action based on nine priority areas of activities including:
With regard to the first activity, the establishment of a peace culture in the region, it is now understood that part of the problem in Africa in general, and West Africa in particular, is the lack, or loss, of a culture of peace. What used to be called in traditional Africa ‘palavatry’ and many other mechanisms for peaceful settlement of quarrels and crises are no longer practised. It was also realised that the wind of democratisation, which continues to blow in Africa is sometimes erroneously misinterpreted, especially among some young people who believe that democratisation may be synonymous with disorganisation, disorder, violence, etc. It is not then surprising in this context to see a dramatic increase of the proliferation of weapons in today’s civil society, including the increase of small arms in the hands of children and an increase in the numbers of child soldiers. For some of us who grew up in Africa, who never saw a grenade or any other sort of weapon of war for that matter, it is shocking to see today that in almost every quarter you find grenades and other instruments of violence in the wrong hands. There is a need to begin an exercise in the region that will contribute to eradicating the culture of violence, which has taken root in such a tragic manner. Towards this end, the Moratorium represents an integral part of the promotion of a culture of peace in the political context. The implementation of this culture of peace in the region will be facilitated by the participation of many civil society organisations and relevant United Nations agencies such as UNESCO. Of course, ECOWAS member states and external partners are expected to contribute as well. One of the priority areas of activity that is of utmost importance is the organisation of training programmes. Part of the problem of controlling arms proliferation is the lack of modern skills and tools for local security, and law and order forces to carry out their work properly. To this end, negotiations have been started with some external partners to bring in technical expertise to PCASED for the organisation of such training programmes. The enhancement of weapons control at border posts is also a critical activity. For example, when we went to Bamako in 1994 as part of the UN mission, we learned that along the border between Mali and Mauritania there were only one or two border posts covering some 1000 kilometres, and thus the area was very open to all kinds of flows. By working with the member states to enhance skills and with the partners to secure the necessary logistical support, it is hoped that the efficiency of existing border posts can be improved and new ones created. The establishment of a database and regional arms register is now underway. As part of the preliminary phase, a workshop is being planned for August at which the operational modalities of the elements for this database will be determined. One of the PCASED partners, the Netherlands, has offered its support for this workshop. The collection and destruction of weapons is also an important activity. Here the experience of what has been done in Mali will form the basis of our efforts. In Mali, the United Nations has been providing support for collection exercises. The Flame of Peace Ceremony is such an example from which PCASED would like to draw to carry out its work. Regarding the review and harmonisation of national legislation and administrative procedures, it was realised that most of the laws bearing on light weapons in the region are outdated. Some of them were left over from the colonial administration of France or the United Kingdom and thus do not necessarily reflect ongoing realities. Part of the work will support the review and harmonisation process of governments so that, by the end of the Moratorium’s three years, the foundation might be laid for a legally binding instrument to regulate, rather than forbid, the importation, exportation and manufacture of light weapons in the region. Such instruments from other parts of the world such as the European Code of Conduct or the OAS Convention on Firearms could serve as useful examples. In terms of the mobilisation of financial resources, PCASED is a five year project with a budget of US$ 10 million, although to date only US$ 6 million has been mobilised. Thus far the major contributors include the governments of Belgium, Canada, France, Norway, Sweden, the UK, the US, and of course the government of Mali itself which has generously contributed by putting the use of a building at its disposal. With regard to the renovation of this building, approximately half of the resources, which are needed, have been pledged, but about US$ 170.000 more is required. Other likely contributors to PCASED include Japan, the Republic of Korea and the Netherlands. In terms of non-government support, NISAT has been very generous and helpful in organising conferences that are instrumental in promoting the objectives of the Moratorium and provide an opportunity to donors to become more familiar with PCASED. While the Moratorium focuses on the official flows of weapons to West Africa, PCASED aims at reinforcing the control objectives by addressing the illicit flows through practical peace-building activities, cutting across security and development. These two mutually reinforcing arrangements are established on the premise that socio-economic development cannot be sustained in an insecure environment. Security and stability precede any meaningful development process. The Role of Civil Society in Promoting the MoratoriumOnce in a generation there comes a God-given individual whose inspiration and foresight contribute immensely to the common lasting good of humankind. This holds true of ancient times as well as of modern times. The prophets of the biblical times fall in this category. In this century, the names of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King (God bless their souls) were precious gifts to humanity. In the contemporary period, the name of Nelson Mandela is the most obvious that comes to mind. In respect of the younger generation I would, with no hesitation whatsoever, include the name of His Excellency Alpha Oumar Konaré, the President of Mali, whose brainchild is this Moratorium. His initiative is like planting a mustard seed. Its healthy growth requires good fertile soil (organic manure not chemical fertiliser) and water. It also calls for concerted efforts at all levels and from all sectors of society for it to flourish. Civil society must play an important role in ensuring the healthy growth of the seed. In fact, civil society, if it keeps faith with its primary calling, cannot but mobilise all its resources, material, moral, spiritual, and otherwise, to the promotion of the Moratorium on light weapons in West Africa. The most valued friend of civil society is peace with justice. Peace provides the most enabling environment for civil society to thrive and to flourish. There are at least four roles that civil society could play in promoting the Moratorium. The seedbed role : The associations, community groups and organisations of civil society should act as seed-beds of fertile ground in which the idea of peace in general and the Moratorium in particular are sown, nurtured and flower within the groups and individual members. This actually is already happening. There is a proliferation of meetings and workshops addressing the issue, the most recent being the West African Civil Society Workshop on the Moratorium held in Bamako, barely two weeks ago.The dissemination role : The organisations and groups of civil society have an enormous capacity to spread and to deepen peace culture within the society. The organisations present at the Civil Society Workshop referred to above undertook, inter alia, to make the implementation of the Moratorium part of their individual activities, and to create a national network on small arms to be made up of national and community-based organisations.The education and training role: Civil society associations and groups are best placed to take on an important role in educating and training their members in knowledge, understanding, attitudes, and skills of peace building and peace maintenance. For the members, participation in peace work becomes second nature; they know its essence, scope and import. Civil society organisations, then, become vehicles of meaningful participation in the wider society. Once the individual’s heart is converted, as is the case with the Moratorium, it is like a bush fire; you can’t stop it. The West African Civil Society Association is committed to ‘make the spirit and content of the Moratorium known and understood among the people, through the use of the media (radio, TV, newspapers), posters, stickers, cultural events, songs on disarmament and the culture of peace.’The advocacy role : Advocacy at local and international levels is absolutely vital in promoting the spirit and letter of the Moratorium. The activities of civil society will be greatly strengthened by the policies, decisions, and work of governments, the business community, and academia that promote peace. It is therefore incumbent upon civil society organisations to relentlessly advocate for legislation, policy, and administration of structures that enable and contribute to peace initiatives. That way it will be possible to build and strengthen an alliance for peace with inclusive participation of all sectors of the society.The Moratorium is too important to be confined to Western Africa alone and efforts at broadening the vision to cover the rest of Africa and, indeed the world as a whole, should be supported. In this wake, the contribution of African traditional civil society is invaluable, as it has been pointed out by Poulton’s book, A Peace of Timbuktu. The African sages are a vast depository of the art of peace-making and peace preservation. The indigenous systems and knowledge characterised by the wise sayings, proverbs and symbols about peace are the least utilised wealth of Africa. The framework of the Moratorium provides enormous opportunities for building on what Africa is best at - the genius of the art of living, the art of forgiveness, the healing of memories as well as reconciliation. Traditionally, African women have contributed immensely to making and keeping peace in the communities and wider society. The role of women and women’s organisations in promoting the Moratorium in Africa, cannot, therefore, be overemphasised. Women do not traditionally participate in war making, but they participate very actively in peace making. But as we know, women and children suffer most from violence and armed conflict. They therefore understand and fully appreciate peace at domestic and community levels. At the launch of the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA), of which the World Council of Churches (WCC) is a founding member, the General Secretary, Dr. Konrad Raiser, remarked that ‘the non-governmental actors hold that a co-ordinated effort to shape, support and supplement governmental actions is essential for effective global action to curb the proliferation and misuse of small arms. ’ The WCC, in collaboration with the Norwegian Initiative on Small Arms Transfers (NISAT) and the Fellowship of Christian Councils of Western Africa (FECCWA), sponsored the Ecumenical Consultation on Micro-Disarmament which was held in Ghana, September 1998, under the auspices of the Christian Council of Ghana. The consultation called on FECCWA to make, and indeed they did make, a formal presentation in support of the Malian initiative at the ECOWAS meeting in Abuja, October 1998. The churches also decided, as part of their responsibility to civil society, ‘to be in the forefront, advocating and lobbying for laws and legislation for tighter control of small arms and light weapons.’ If the churches undertake to preach on the Moratorium, then we have a constituency whose multiplier effect will go a long way to promoting justice and peace in Africa. The WCC has recently decided to revitalise its work on micro-disarmament. The 1998 Ghana consultation was an initial step in putting the issue at the centre of the ecumenical agenda as we move into the new millennium. Through the work on micro-disarmament, we are in the process of conducting a survey of churches and church-related groups to compile a resource list, bringing churches together from different parts of the world to develop a platform and plan of action and find ways to promote local, national and regional initiatives. The problem of small arms proliferation is, indeed, global. Regional action plans and agreements are very important, but they can greatly benefit from outside co-operation and assistance. Initiatives to provide such outside support and link the global, regional, and local programmes are therefore particularly significant. Perhaps the first example is the co-operation between Mali and its neighbouring West African States and the international community. This WCC global switchboard role, and the linking and networking of local and international actors are critical to the success of micro-disarmament. Disarmament issues in general have long been on the agenda of the ecumenical movement since the early years of this century. Today we are very focused and intent on building a culture of peace and this remains our primary objective. The specific challenges posed by the proliferation of guns and light weapons, and by illicit arms trafficking, have only served to strengthen our resolve to work towards overcoming violence. We do not have to reiterate that peace is an inescapable prerequisite to development. As Mwalimu Nyerere once said, ‘Peace is another word for development.’ Sustainable peace is the surest guarantee to life with dignity in sustainable and viable communities. In conclusion, through our world-wide network, the WCC will facilitate and promote spaces for sharing widely and mobilising support for the churches in West Africa in their resolution which states: ‘We pledge our support to the Malian initiative on the Moratorium on Small Arms and we will work tirelessly for the elimination of the threat of small arms in our region, and indeed in Africa and the whole world. For us this commitment is borne out of our belief in the value (and sanctity) of human life and right of all God’s children and decent to a fulfilling life.’ General Discussion: ImplementationThe session opened with a discussion of whether or not observance of the principles of humanitarian law and human rights law could be made an integral part of all small arms agreements and, if so, how compliance could be ensured. One expert pointed out that the Wassenaar Arrangement, for example, as a political commitment, is not legally binding and that export control decisions, therefore, rest with the individual Member States. Wassenaar cannot be expected to enforce rules, it can only apply political and moral pressure. Nonetheless, even though the Wassenaar Arrangement was not originally conceived to deal with small weapons, all parties are signatories of the Geneva Conventions. Wassenaar Members might thus consider the possibility of including the observance of humanitarian principles in future agreements. It was also pointed out that the ICRC and several NGOs had lobbied the EU to include references to the respect for human rights in its Code of Conduct on Small Arms Transfers, leading the EU to include human rights law criteria in the approval of export permits. These criteria are aimed at preventing deliveries of arms that would be used in the violation of human rights and represent a step forward in the thinking on export controls. Regarding enforcement, the suggestion was made that the humanitarian principles that are violated by arms transfers into a region covered by a moratorium could certainly be a cause for campaigning by civil society. Even if legal sanctions are not available, there is at least the possibility to embarrass violators. The problem of current and former combatants among refugee populations and in refugee camps in the border regions of areas in conflict was mentioned as an issue, which needed addressing. It was observed by one participant that refugee camps often harbour combatants who stash weapons and operate out of the camps. These individuals or groups pose a danger not only in the camps, but for the host country as well. The questions were asked: ‘how can combatants be separated from the innocent refugees?’; ‘how can the former combatants be rehabilitated?’; and ‘how, specifically, can the UN and PCASED help?’. Responding to this, one expert explained that PCASED, as a multi-disciplinary programme, has the support of numerous UN agencies, like the UNHCR, to help in this sort of determination and to identify arms caches. The approach also encompasses work in the border regions in the resolution of security problems. Some donor countries supporting PCASED have stipulated in their support agreements that the collection of weapons must be part of the programme. There was general agreement on the need to support the Moratorium and exploit its momentum. The panellists were praised for addressing not only the issue of disarmament, but also the cultural causes of violence, i.e. the lack of education and values. The importance of attacking both the symptoms and causes of the problems of small arms proliferation were stressed. Many participants reiterated the extreme importance of ensuring the success of the Moratorium. This success, according to one, depends on a growing and effective support of weapons exporting countries. Furthermore, respect for the Moratorium must be complete and effective co-ordination of all projects related to the Moratorium must be established. Finally, government ministers responsible for economic development co-operation must be closely involved as they have the means to make substantial financial contributions. A reference was made to one panellist’s statement concerning the agreement between ECOWAS and the Wassenaar Arrangement countries to embark on a dialogue on how the Wassenaar countries can contribute to the implementation of the Moratorium. This was answered with the reminder that further discussions were to take place later in May. A question concerning programmes for dealing with the problem of child soldiers/armed children, a particularly serious problem in West Africa, was posed. In response, one expert explained that a declaration on child soldiers was accepted by the ECOWAS ministers in March, although nothing has been done yet with regard to specific measures. The course of action comprises three phases: 1) carrying out general sensitisation on the phenomenon; 2) adopting a more pro-active political action with the governments in the region; 3) Working with governments to formulate a regional or sub-regional convention on the issue, bearing in mind that a universal instrument exists. Another participant added that there is a precise and comprehensive provision in the African Charter on the rights and welfare of children adopted several years ago within the framework of the OAU. Thirteen of the fifteen States needed to ratify the provision for inclusion in the OAU Charter have done so. One participant gave an overview of what he believed to be the long-, medium-, and short-term goals of controlling small arms proliferation and its related violence. He stressed that internal political systems and the level of economic development are of crucial importance in the development of armed conflicts and that, in the long-term, the creation of open, active civil societies is necessary. The medium range task should be to create the legal and political instruments to resolve problems of uncontrolled or illicit arms traffic and that, while much has been accomplished, work still needs to be carried out on the diplomatic front. In the short-run, the practical steps to implementation must include the establishment of effective import/export control systems, including the appropriate legislation, administrative procedures and enforcement structures. Receiving countries need to put in place the proper import controls and develop rehabilitation programmes in post conflict areas. Lastly, there was a discussion about dealing with the problem of arms suppliers outside of the Wassenaar Arrangement. The need for a collaboration of the suppliers and recipients and for bringing suppliers outside the Wassenaar Arrangement on board was expressed. The question was asked as to how this could be done and how transfers of arms from Wassenaar countries through third non-member countries could be contained.In response, an expert explained that 80-85 percent of the small arms are produced within the Wassenaar area and that, small arms producing Wassenaar countries require end-user certificates from importing countries. Wassenaar countries, at least, try to ascertain who is receiving their exports. During the course of the discussion, several representatives from donor governments present voiced again their strong moral support and reviewed their financial support pledged or under discussion. International Support for the West African MoratoriumThe uncontrolled proliferation and use of small arms represent one of the greatest humanitarian challenges of our time. Some of the most serious and most gruesome violations of fundamental human rights today take place in areas of armed conflict where small arms play a major role. In today’s conflicts, up to 90 per cent of the casualties are civilians. Indeed, in too many of these conflicts, targeting civilians for the purpose of forced dislocation, massacres and other atrocities, seems to be the very purpose of conflict. Even the efforts to help the victims of conflicts become targeted with humanitarian workers increasingly singled out for harassment or even assassination. Here again, easy access to small arms in conflict areas is a main reason. The use and abuse of child soldiers is one of the ugliest aspects of this issue. Clearly it is important to address it because the children are our main hope if we want to switch from a culture of violence to a culture of peace. A child soldier with a handgun is the very negation of that hope. It has been often repeated that armed conflict is a major barrier to development. The widespread distribution of small arms makes it too easy to resolve conflicts by resorting to violence. In an environment of insecurity, small arms proliferation and the general breakdown of the rule of law, it is difficult to initiate and fund long-term development projects. Without development it is often impossible to solve the problems that lead to violence. This vicious circle must be broken. Thus is why the example of Mali and West Africa has an importance far beyond its region. It has become an arena to develop new concepts and new mechanisms to deal in a more integrated way with the problems facing not only West Africa, but other regions as well. The concepts of ‘security first’ and the proportional and integrated approach to development that are now being examined in West Africa are also being transferred to other regions. It is the considered view of the Government of Norway that we all have a moral obligation to both alleviate the suffering caused by small arms and to work towards greater control of these weapons. There is a role for all actors in these efforts, be they governments, donor countries, the United Nations, regional organisations such as ECOWAS, or civil society. Here again West Africa plays a leading role in the international efforts. Nowhere else is there such a unison of political will to join forces in far-reaching and practical activities. Without their bold new approach and the untiring efforts of HE President Alpha Oumar Konaré and other leaders in West Africa, we would not be where we are today. It is now necessary that the international community assist West African countries in making the Moratorium a reality. The question for countries outside the region is, or course, what can we do to support? In the view of the Norwegian government, there are several ways to be of assistance: First, additional funding for the implementation of the Moratorium is needed. The Norwegian government is proud to have been part of the initiative from its early days and has contributed about US$ 2.5 million to the demobilisation and reintegration programme in Northern Mali. It organised an international meeting on the proposed Moratorium in Norway in April last year in connection with the visit by President Konaré where wide support was expressed for the initiative, both by Western weapons-producing countries and by West African countries. Norway has pledged funding for the Moratorium and already contributed US$ 1 million, even before it was formally declared. Other countries are now joining and have pledged their support as well. Of course, UNDP, ECOWAS and the UN Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament are playing key roles in supporting the Moratorium. There is still a considerable funding gap, however. Today’s International Consultation clearly shows the need for additional international support for the Moratorium and it is hoped that additional countries will pledge their support for the Moratorium in the coming weeks. Second, in addition to financial support, the international community should provide technical assistance for the implementation of the Moratorium. The critical areas for international support have been identified by the West African countries. The UNDP will play a key role in providing and co-ordinating this assistance. Third, the international community must ensure that the Moratorium is respected. The Wassenaar Arrangement and Member States can play a significant role in this connection through national legislative and political measures. All weapons-producing countries must inform weapon producers about the Moratorium and put in place the appropriate national regulations. Fourth, governments should continue to give political support to the efforts to curb the proliferation of small arms not only in West Africa, but in other regions of the world as well where armed conflicts are causing so much human suffering. Norway is part of a very informal network of countries encompassing countries in Europe, the Americas, in Africa and in Asia and, through this network, continues to look for ways and means in which this crucially important agenda can be moved forward. An intergovernmental meeting was held in Oslo last June and a follow-up is envisaged later this year. Fifth, Norway will continue to work with NGOs and civil society to create awareness and to spur new initiatives to bolster popular support to create a community base for the need to act. The Norwegian government is proud to have supported the Norwegian Initiative on Small Arms Transfers and the networking between NISAT and other emerging small arms initiatives. The uniquely important role played in the campaign against small arms by the International Red Cross Movement must also be commended. Sixth, the Government of Norway continues to work with other countries to promote political solutions to the conflicts in question, negotiating settlements that provide for the demobilisation of soldiers and the accumulation of small arms. In Geneva this November, Norway will co-sponsor a workshop on small arms during the 27th International Red Cross and Red Crescent Conference. This workshop will focus specifically on the West African Moratorium and will be organised jointly by the Governments of Mali and Norway together with the Malian Red Crescent and the Norwegian Red Cross. The West African Moratorium represents a milestone in the lives of millions of West Africans. If the West African Moratorium proves successful, it will be a shining example that could inspire similar activities elsewhere. But if the Moratorium fails in spite of our efforts, it will be a major setback to all international action to control small arms. It is up to us to make the right decisions to make the Moratorium a reality. L'appui international au Moratoire des Etats d'Afrique de l'OuestAmbassadeur R. Kunz, Département des affaires étrangères suisse (International Support for
|
|
|
Contents / Chapter 1 / Chapter 2 / Chapter 3 / Chapter 4 / Chapter 5 / Chapter 6 / Annexes |