U.S. sides with Russia, China and Syria on arms trade treaty
In one part of the United Nations complex this week, the United States was inveighing against China and Russia for its defense of the Syrian regime. In another, it was much more quietly siding with those governments. The issue was the groundrules for the planned July conference to draft a global arms trade treaty. The ...
In one part of the United Nations complex this week, the United States was inveighing against China and Russia for its defense of the Syrian regime. In another, it was much more quietly siding with those governments. The issue was the groundrules for the planned July conference to draft a global arms trade treaty. The key question was whether that conference would run by consensus, a process that effectively awards every participant a veto. Lou Charbonneau of Reuters reported on the debate.
In one part of the United Nations complex this week, the United States was inveighing against China and Russia for its defense of the Syrian regime. In another, it was much more quietly siding with those governments. The issue was the groundrules for the planned July conference to draft a global arms trade treaty. The key question was whether that conference would run by consensus, a process that effectively awards every participant a veto. Lou Charbonneau of Reuters reported on the debate.
The United States, Russia, China, Syria, Iran and others pushing for unanimity have argued that the only way to ensure universal compliance is to get all countries on board. Those who dislike the virtual veto, like Mexico and some European countries, believe it could mean that whatever treaty is agreed on in July – if there is one – will be weak.
"As we have seen in the case of Syria, veto power leads to inaction and hampers the ability of the international community to prevent conflict," said Jeff Abramson of the group Control Arms. He was referring to Russia’s and China’s veto of two U.N. Security Council resolutions condemning Syria’s crackdown.
In the end, participants at this week’s discussions at U.N. headquarters agreed that decisions at the drafting conference in July would be taken by consensus. A senior U.S. official described the veto as "the nuclear option" – a last resort.
The question of whether international treaties are negotiated on a consensus basis has become a pressing issue in recent years. During the 1990s, the land mines convention and the Rome Statute creating the International Criminal Court were both finalized without the support of key powers–including the United States. In both those cases, the Clinton administration failed to develop a coherent strategy for the negotiations and was ultimately unable to get the changes it sought. Because there was no firm rule that the draft text had to be adopted by consensus, the United States was badly outvoted in both cases, producing public-relations disasters. By insisting on consensus, the Obama administration appears determined to avoid a similar outcome.
The arms trade treaty negotiations will take place just as the 2012 campaign enters high gear, and conservative legislators are already warning that the Obama administration will attempt to impose restrictions on gun rights via the treaty.
David Bosco is a professor at Indiana University’s Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies. He is the author of The Poseidon Project: The Struggle to Govern the World’s Oceans. Twitter: @multilateralist
More from Foreign Policy
Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.
Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.
It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.
Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
