WIREDGOV

EXPERT COMMENT

Momentous decisions made during the post-2001 era have failed to control weapons of all types, but now is the time to put right those wrongs.

In the weeks following the 9/11 attacks, analysts said everything was going to change and they were proved right. Just as the decades following the two world wars were heavily influenced by their outcomes and atrocities, the ‘war on terror’ has been the backdrop and set the tone for most international interactions for the past 20 years.

And yet just weeks before the attacks, two international arms control measures were coming to a head at the United Nations (UN) which – without the impact of 9/11 – could have changed the future history of arms control for the better. But as the world changed course, both measures ended up creating major repercussions still being played out now.

The first measure was an international effort to address a problematic illicit trade. The UN Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons was adopted in July 2001 – following repeated attempts to weaken its language from a then newly-elected Bush administration in the US – and later built on to include legal instruments for tracking small arms and light weapons.

This eventually led to the Arms Trade Treaty of 2013 to prevent weapons being sold to human rights abusers. But, as witnessed all too clearly in recent weeks with the Taliban’s ability to accrue weaponry, transport it to Afghanistan, and secure further weapons on the way to the takeover of Kabul, its effectiveness has proved to be far too limited.

Click here to continue reading the full version of this Expert Comment on the Chatham House website.