Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE UNITED NATIONS General Assembly today voted, almost unanimously, to adopt a global arms trade treaty.
For the first time ever, states will be prohibited from selling arms to countries when they know those weapons will be used to carry out genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes.
In the UN General Assembly 154 states voted to adopt the treaty just days after Iran, North Korea and Syria – three countries under some form of UN sanctions – tried to block it. Only three countries votes against the treaty with 23 abstentions.
Commenting after the vote Colm O’Gorman, Executive Director of Amnesty International Ireland said it was a “truly historic moment”.
“This treaty can stop arms ending up in the hands of war criminals and human rights abusers,” he said. “Amnesty International has been campaigning for two decades for this result and it’s an incredible achievement for a generation of activists, supporters and members.”
The treaty obliges all governments to assess the risk of transferring arms, ammunition or components to another country where they could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Where that risk is real and cannot be mitigated, states have agreed the transfer will not go forward.
O’Gorman said the Irish government was one of the treaty’s “strongest supporters” and its representatives in New York “worked extremely hard over the last two weeks to ensure a strong treaty was agreed”.
The treaty was adopted after more than six years of UN deliberations and will cover major categories of conventional arms, including small arms and light weapons which proliferate in countries with low-level conflicts, armed violence and a massive number of civilian casualties.
Now the treaty will be opened for signatures and ratification on 3 June 2013 at the UN General Assembly and will enter into force shortly after it has been ratified by 50 states.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Countries will just claim they didnt know they were going to be used to carry out crimes
There is too much money involved, business wont let this get off the ground
Sadly you are probably right:-(
Its a shame its taken this long to actually happen.. Endless lives lost that could have been somewhat prevented a long time ago.
Do u really believe that Arms tRading will stop -
— it would ruIn – or atleast badly affect many economies – notably USA/UK/France .
Stop sales of Arms to Israel or SA – well of course if push came to shove they could send them as a gift .
Too much world trade on all sides ihas to do with weapons industry .
Its just more junk from UN
It still won’t make a blind bit of difference , the un is a toothless animal as we have seen in the past
Agreed, I would describe them as “impotent “
So they’ll sell to an intermediary instead….
Like in that Nicholas Cage movie… Where he was an arms dealer… What was it called again?? He was some kind of War Lord…. Oh yeah, City of Angels, that’s the one….
You’re right Brian. Hopefully they’ll have that covered.
Thats called the Lord of War…And the best line in it was ” One in eleven people are unarmed on this planet.How do we arm the other ten?”
Well ,watch plenty more genocide and massacres happen because of this stupidity on a global scale from the One world Govt.This has given dictatorships and tyrants a charter to massacre unarmed pouplations as they know now the unarmed will never be able to get enough defensive weaponry to defend themselves.When it does happen the UN will be in talking mode and call for restraint on both sides..Nice,if you are trying to counter a helicopter gunship with a muzzle loading shotgun.
The UN ,the worst organisation that was ever dreamed up by mankind! It has more blood on its collective hands thru inaction in the last 60 years than some countries.
Iran, North Korea and Syria are the only countries that voted No.
Not surprising.
It’s amazing how people actually make North Korea (referring to the government/military of course) out to be as the victims of American/South Korean “bullying”. America and South Korea don’t put their own people in concentration camps. No one should even recognize North Korea as a legitimate state as the North Korean people have absolutely no rights. There goals of a United Korea are absolutely delusional.
Preaching to the choir here Kevin.
North Korea is only a buffer zone between the US and China and in some messed up way has to be legitimate to act as such. Just crazy. When power remains in the hands of the few the many will continue to suffer.
I wonder who the 23 abstentions were ? Anyway, positive move forward.
Full breakdown of the vote here, Mark – http://twitdoc.com/upload/marcellehopkins/voting-record-of-the-att-reso.pdf Most notable are China, Russia and Egypt.
Cheers
To Little To Late as the UK has sold most of these arms the the worst regimes in the Middle East and India.
India?
Quite amazing that states have to be told not to sell to these places!
it means nothing there still going to be sold under the table out of site out of mind .
You know what will really stick in the throat of B. Lowe and the rest of his cronies is that they can’t even point at America or the Western Allies and say “Look they abstained”.
Where’s petr tarasov these days? Thinking up a new identity?
Banged up in either Russia or the US I belive.
Took years to formulate, no doubt will take days for states to find a way around it. The permanent members of the security council all happen to be the largest arms exporters in the world.
Long time coming – has the potential to make a real difference once it enters into force.
Quite amazing that states have to be told this!
Lol.
Any comment on the fact that Syria, Iran and NK are the only countries that voted no, and Russia and China both abstained? Does that tell you anything about which states commonly carry out human rights abuses and who might arm them?
Remember there is nothing in this treaty to prevent arms sales for legitimate use…
We both know he is running for cover on this one.
BLowe bashes American/Western media constantly while worshipping RT (the Russian station not RTE), Al Jazeera, and any other anti-American media group. While pointing out the bias/bigotry of any news organizations is good; its hard to take someone seriously when they apply different standards depending on the country that media is from. I can say one thing Russia and Qatar would never allow FOX to set up a Russian or Qatari version of their station in their countries. Meanwhile RT and Al Jazeera have US versions of their channels and constantly spout anti-American rhetoric.
Yes, b Lowe can you explain why your 3 favorite regimes have said no?
B Lowe, did Venezuela abstain as well?
Have you been to Venezuela Declan ?
John, it’s looks to me that Venezuela abstained. Correct me if I’m wrong. Venezuela is another of b lowes fave places.
”Does that tell you anything about which states commonly carry out human rights abuses and who might arm them”
No – it just tells us who are the most clever at hiding what they do . The US cant do without its Arms trade – which in the end may be a seriuos Achiiles heel – and the idea od US/UK not supplying their proxy countriees for self defence is not on .
Remember the US claims the right to a Pre-emtive strike – and this follows thro to its ”Allies” .
This is the get out cluase – as if it was needed
”from selling arms to countries when they know those weapons will be used to carry out genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes”
this bit of paper – well the best that can be said for it – it gave Employment to some for a few days / weeks .
Jim, the best Defence is to have a better offence. That’s what preemptive strike is all about.
The US learnt that lesson at pearl harbour.
After WW2 and during the Cold War and beyond the US has stuck to that strategy.
It’s not about attacking a defenceless country. It’s about being on guard against a country that wants to harm you.
Hit them before they hit you.
Simple.
I do hope that North Korea, Iran and Syria are exempt from this. … you know with them being such shining examples of responsible thinking and out standing members of the global family we should, rightly so, cut them some slack
Is there a use for arms that’s not criminal? They should go a step further and retract and recycle the lot!
To stop criminals……..
To defend yourself from criminals wether petty theives or genocidal Govts.
Imagine if six million Jews each had in the 1930s a single shot .22 pistol. Nazism wouldnt never have happened, or 26 million Russians had had the same…Stalin would have never massacred them either.
Thats one of the benefits of gun control and arms control in the 20th century , over 100 MILLION civillian DEAD! That were either disarmed and massacred by invaders or by their own Govts before hand.
Why o why , a man needs his arms…..
Come on Declan , Australia warned the US of the pearl harbour attack , it’s a well known fact so maybe the best defence would have been to get their men out of there before it happened , don’t you think
Actually Britan knew about it but on Churchills orders kept very sthumm as Churchill needed the US iin the war with the UK as an ally.But there was alot more to it too, Washington was hardly going to belive the UK ,a nation at war with Japan that an attack was iminent,despite plenty of Japanese provacation for at least five years before hand in the Pacific .The complete secrecy and surprise that the Japanese carrier fleet operated under on the Pearl Harbour strike.The “Aw shucks nuthin will happen here in Hawaii.”Attitude shown by the top brass in Hawaii,even when the radar picked the entire Japanese air fleet on the way in on n attack a half hour out,and ships could have brought to general quaters,planes got in the air,and guns manned.It was “dont worry about it,they are proably ours coming in from California!!!”
Funnily the same attitude prevailed that Wed in the US on 9/11.Same warnings,same indifference.
have your say