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.