ASEAN needs to address illegal trade in small arms

ASEAN needs to address illegal trade in small arms

Philips J. Vermonte, Centre for Strategic and International Studies,
Jakarta

Despite the end of the Cold War, there remains widespread
conflict across the world. In his well-known An Agenda for Peace
report, former United Nations secretary-general Boutros Boutros-
Ghali showed that the characteristics of conflicts have altered
since the Cold War. Conflicts now occur more frequently within
states than between states.

In addition, conflicts usually develop into ethnic or
religious wars followed by a brutal civil war, for example
Maluku. These conflicts do not involve regular soldiers, but are
more often armed civilians, militias or guerrillas that have not
adopted a chain of command.

As a consequence, unarmed civilians have become the main
victims. The large number of casualties is caused by the
widespread use of small arms and light weapons; the illegal use
of small arms contributes to these conflicts.

The Small Arms Survey 2001 report published by the Graduate
Institute of International Studies in Geneva noted that small
arms and light weapons have caused the deaths of at least 500,000
people each year and injured millions more, be they combatants in
intra-state conflict, criminals, or just innocent civilians.

The problem of small-arms trafficking is complex and sensitive
as it involves cross-border activities. Hence, it is not only an
international security issue, but has regional, national and even
local dimensions. Worse, access to the ownership of small arms
and light weapons is not limited to those from the government;
anyone can easily purchase them from either the legal or black
market.

And most importantly, small arms are easy to use and require
almost no training to use. As a result, the use of small arms in
a conflict by militias or even children is widespread because
small arms are relatively cheap, easily transported or
circulated. The illicit use of small arms could pose a threat to
state, civilian security.

The breakdown of the bipolar structure of international
politics has contributed to the changing pattern of the
international arms trade. As a consequence of the withdrawal of
support from the former super powers, the former Soviet Union and
the United States, many states and groups have had to rely on
their own strategies to survive.

For example, insurgent groups or warring parties in a conflict
may associate themselves with many illegal activities to ensure
their ability to purchase arms needed for their cause. It
sometimes means that such groups engage in illegal trade
conducted by organized transnational crime syndicates involved in
narcotics, people smuggling and so on.

With the growing concern of threats coming from global
terrorist activities, the issue of small arms has become a
serious threat for Southeast Asia. Because small arms are so
accessible, it is possible that terrorist groups, whoever they
may be, can equip themselves with arms and present a danger to
the public. Therefore, the problem of small arms proliferation
needs to be addressed.

In its 1997 ministerial meeting in Malaysia, the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) firmly stated that small-arms
smuggling is an inseparable part of terrorism, drug trafficking,
money laundering, piracy and human trafficking. The 1998 Manila
Declaration on the Prevention and Control of Transnational Crime
reiterated ASEAN members' commitment through the strengthening of
regional collaboration to combat transnational crime, which
includes the small arms issue.

However, little has been done in curbing the demand of small
arms in the region. As one report states, ASEAN members seem to
be reactive rather than proactive in dealing with the issue. It
may stem from the fact that the impact of the trade of small arms
varies from one member country to another. Therefore, it is
understandable that the view of small-arms trafficking as a
security threat has not gained sufficient attention, and has
taken a backseat compared to other issues, such as drug and human
trafficking.

The fact that ASEAN is still a "sovereignty-enhancing" rather
than a "sovereignty-reducing" body contributes to the lack of
trust among ASEAN members, and in turn prevents them from doing
what they perceive as interfering in the domestic affairs of
their fellow members; whereas the main characteristic of the non-
conventional security threat into which the issue of small arms
can be grouped, is its cross-border nature.

Despite the above declared commitments, ASEAN remains
powerless as its members continue to prefer bilateral agreements
rather than creating regulations that bind the region as a whole.

It shows that ASEAN has not departed from its early stage of
development -- providing a confidence-building mechanism --
compared to preventative diplomacy.

In fact, the declarations in Manila and Kuala Lumpur have
provided common ground for ASEAN to emphasize the transnational
crime aspect of the illicit trade of small arms, so ASEAN members
could be more open toward each other and more flexible in their
approach to this sovereignty-related issue.

However, it is not only the issue of illicit small-arms
trafficking that needs to be confronted. The legal arms trade
must also be closely monitored, because arms production is mainly
legal -- but there are some circumstances in which arms could
fall into irresponsible hands through many ways, including
bribery and corruption committed by individuals or bodies
authorized to legally produce, monitor and distribute them.