The first global treaty on regulating themultimillion-dollar arms trade appeared to be nearing consensus, supporterssaid, though worries remained that Iran, India or other countries would backoff an agreement that requires approval from all 193 United Nations memberstates.
Thursday is the deadline for reaching a deal. U.N.diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity because negotiations have beenprivate, said Wednesday the United States was virtually certain to go alongwith the latest text.
Hopes of reaching agreement on what would be a landmarktreaty were dashed last July when the U.S. said it needed more time to considerthe proposed accord — a move quickly backed by Russia and China. In December,the U.N. General Assembly decided to hold a final conference and set Thursdayas the deadline.
"We need a treaty," China's U.N. Ambassador LiBaodong told The Associated Press. "We hope for consensus."
Iran, Egypt, India and several other countries have hadserious concerns about the text.
There has never been an international treaty regulating theestimated $60 billion global arms trade. For more than a decade, activists andsome governments have been pushing for international rules to try to keepillicit weapons out of the hands of terrorists, insurgent fighters andorganized crime.
"It's important for each and every country in the worldthat we have a regulation of the international arms trade," Germany's U.N.Ambassador Peter Wittig told the AP. "There are still some divergencies ofviews, but I trust we can overcome them."
The draft treaty does not control the domestic use ofweapons in any country, but it would require all countries to establishnational regulations to control the transfer of conventional arms, parts andcomponents and to regulate arms brokers. It would prohibit states that ratifythe treaty from transferring conventional weapons if they would violate armsembargoes or if they would promote acts of genocide, crimes against humanity orwar crimes.
The final draft makes this human rights provision evenstronger, adding that the export of conventional arms should be prohibited ifthey could be used in the commission of attacks on civilians or civilianbuildings such as schools and hospitals.
In considering whether to authorize the export of arms, thedraft says a country must evaluate whether the weapon would be used to violateinternational human rights or humanitarian laws or be used by terrorists ororganized crime. The final draft would allow countries to determine whether theweapons transfer would contribute to or undermine peace and security.
Anna Macdonald, Oxfam's head of arms control, said the scopeof the weapons covered in the latest draft is still too narrow.
"We need a treaty that covers all conventional weapons,not just some of them," she said. "We need a treaty that will make adifference to the lives of the people living in Congo, Mali, Syria andelsewhere who suffer each day from the impacts of armed violence."
Ammunition has been a key issue, with some countriespressing for the same controls on ammunition sales as arms, but the U.S. andothers opposed such tough restrictions. The draft calls for each country thatratifies the treaty to establish regulations for the export of ammunition"fired, launched or delivered" by the weapons covered by theconvention.
The Control Arms coalition, which represents about 100organizations worldwide campaigning for a strong treaty, and diplomats fromcountries that support them, said this wouldn't cover hand grenades and mines.
India and other countries had insisted that the treaty havean opt-out for government arms transfers under defense cooperation agreements.The new text appears to keep that loophole, stating that implementation of thetreaty "shall not prejudice obligations" under defense cooperationagreements by countries that ratify the treaty.
"Making this treaty was like making a sausage: Everyonehas added an ingredient," said Ted Bromund, a senior research fellow atThe Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
"Unfortunately, that has produced a document that leansmuch too far towards satisfying the concerns of the Arab Group and Mexico. Theformer view it as a rebellion prevention plan, while the latter wants a textthat edges towards its view that the domestic firearms market in the U.S.should be subject to treaty regulation," he said.
But Daryl Kimball, executive director of the independentWashington-based Arms Control Association, said, "The emerging treaty representsan important first step in dealing with the unregulated and illicit globaltrade in conventional weapons and ammunition, which fuels wars and human rightsabuses worldwide."
He said the text could have been stronger and morecomprehensive, but it can still make an important difference.
"The new treaty says to every United Nations memberthat you cannot simply 'export and forget,'" Kimball said.