ATT Monitor, Vol. 17, No. 2
Time to Put People and the Planet Before Profits from the Arms Trade
29 August 2025
By Laura Varella
Download full edition in PDF
On 25–29 August 2025, delegations met in Geneva for the Eleventh Conference of States Parties (CSP11) to the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). States parties adopted several measures aimed at strengthening the implementation of the Treaty, including on gender, and decided to initiate a process for a five-year strategy for the ATT. However, at a time when the arms trade is fuelling genocide, apartheid, and wars worldwide, much more is expected from this Treaty.
Arms-fuelled genocide
Throughout the week, several delegations referred to the humanitarian situation in Gaza. While some called for adherence to Articles 6 and 7 of the ATT without naming states, or limited their calls to a ceasefire and the entry of humanitarian aid in Gaza, others explicitly linked the atrocities being committed in Palestine to the flow of weapons being exported to Israel.
Colombia, which recently joined the ATT, said it would not “stand by watching a genocide, or war crimes, or apartheid.” It recalled the efforts of the Hague Group and the Joint Declaration of the Ministerial Conference on the Emergency on Palestine held in Bogotá in July 2025. It emphasised that in their national contexts, states can put an end to the export of weapons, equipment, military fuel, and other materials to Israel, so as not to facilitate genocide.
Similarly, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) expressed deep concern that many ATT states parties continue the trade of conventional arms and materials to Israel while it continues its genocidal acts in Gaza. It called upon those states to suspend all relevant licenses immediately, to avoid further complicity in the commission of international crimes. Amnesty International also emphasised that states parties must impose a comprehensive arms embargo on Israel and the end of transit and transhipment of military goods bound for Israel through their jurisdictions. Türkiye, Maat for Peace, Development and Human Rights, Law for Palestine, and others made similar remarks.
Belgium said it has decided not to issue any arms export licenses that would strengthen the military capacity of the forces involved in the conflict in Gaza. Spain also said that it has stopped exporting arms to Israel in fulfilment of Article 6 of the ATT.
Control Arms noted that the F-35 joint strike fighter programme involves components and subcomponents produced by multiple ATT states parties. It affirmed that the programme has led to regulatory exemption on the part of ATT states parties, particularly related to the simplified licencing procedures. It noted that the components, while themselves not lethal, are essential to the lethal use of conventional arms, and therefore must be strictly controlled, as explicitly noted under Article 6 and 7 of the Treaty. Amnesty International also expressed similar concerns (for more information on the F-35 joint strike fighter programme, see the side event report below in the publication).
Palestine highlighted the violence perpetrated by Israeli settlers against Palestinians with weapons supplied by the government of Israel. It also affirmed that for decades, Israel has used Palestine as a testing ground for new weapons and surveillance technologies. Palestine also emphasised that over 100,000 tons of explosives have been dropped on Gaza, resulting in the mass killing, starvation, and displacement of civilians, and the collapse of healthcare and education systems. “The International Court of Justice has already ruled that Israel is plausibly committing genocide. This must compel the international community to act,” said Palestine, also calling upon all ATT states parties to impose an arms embargo in Israel, halt all trade and cooperation with the illegal settlements, and ensure accountability for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Palestine commended the steps taken by Slovenia, Spain, Japan, Belgium, Germany, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (UK), and the members of the Hague Group, in suspending arms exports on different levels. However, it noted that collective and decisive actions is still needed, and reiterated that all states parties must adhere to Article 6 and 7 of the ATT.
Israel, meanwhile, argued that arms are being deliberately transferred to “terrorist groups” in the Middle East. It asserted that Palestine and others continue to use the ATT to promote “false narratives of a non-existent genocide.” It said that the proliferation and distortion of the term genocide is a dangerous and malicious trend. Israel, which is not an ATT state party, said that the “instrumentalisation of the ATT for political purposes, which we witness time after time in this forum by some delegations, is a very bad service to the purpose of the treaty, and therefore universalisation.
Palestine reiterated the ICJ ruling from January 2024 that Israel is plausibly committing genocide in Gaza. It emphasised that several world leading genocide scholars qualified Israel’s actions ad genocide, as well as journalists, UN experts, and many others. Palestine stressed that the continuous arms transfers deals to Israel and funding of apartheid led to the current situation.
At the end of the first day of Conference, the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement organised a protest in front of the CSP11 venue. Among their demands, they called on states parties to end their complicity in the genocide perpetrated by Israel and to: 1) Apply the Treaty’s provisions by effectively prohibiting all transfers, including export, import, transit, transhipment and brokering, to and from Israel, of arms, ammunition or their parts and components, as well as dual-use goods; 2) Ensure that national control systems are effective and that violations of the treaty by member states are subject to appropriate sanctions and accountability measures; and 3) Withdraw any diplomatic privileges granted to Israel as a signatory to the Treaty.
On Tuesday afternoon, an activist interrupted the meeting and screamed “arms embargo now,” among other demands, and was dragged out of the room by security guards.
Time to face the horrors of the arms trade
Delegations highlighted their concerns regarding arms transfers to other conflicts as well. Amnesty International highlighted that the ongoing conflict in Sudan has killed tens of thousands of civilians and injured many more, including as a result of war crimes and crimes against humanity. It said that despite this, weapons, including parts and components, continue to flow into Sudan, in some instances originating in or passing through ATT signatories or states parties’ territories. Amnesty International also noted that Myanmar’s military junta has continued to carry out attacks against the civilian population with total impunity. It emphasised that armed groups in Myanmar have also committed abuses. “ATT signatories and state parties must ensure they are in no way involved where the directly or indirectly in the transfer of arms to these conflicts,” said Amnesty.
Control Arms, Maat for Peace, and others also expressed concern with the situation in Sudan, Myanmar, and other places. The European Union (EU) and several European states condemned the supply of weapons, parts, and components to Russia.
The increasing number of states raising concern with compliance issues in their statements is a welcome development in the ATT, which is traditionally a space where such actions are seen as disruptive. For years, civil society organisations have been calling for the establishment of a mechanism or agenda item to deal with compliance issues. Last year, a conversation around specific arms transfers took place for the first time under the Sub-Working Group on Current and Emerging Implementation Issues, when states parties discussed “The ATT and the case of the Palestinian People.” This year, in February, an ad hoc discussion took place under the same Sub-Working Group on “How are rulings of the International Court of Justice and findings of the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council taken into account when States Parties and Signatory States are applying Articles 6 and 7 (in reference to the situations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, Myanmar and the Sudan.”
However, some states opposed having these discussions around compliance, arguing that such talks would politicise the Treaty (see our previous ATT Monitor for more details). Some delegations even questioned the possibility of civil society proposing topics for the ad hoc discussions, despite this being in the decision adopted in CSP9. Nevertheless, during this Conference, there was an overwhelming support for “civil society inclusion and participation,” including from the EU, Aotearoa New Zealand, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Czech Republic, Guatemala, Germany, Luxembourg, Mexico, and Sweden. China said that “it does not oppose the constructive participation of other stakeholders in making positive contributions to the treaty’s effective implementation.”
The good news is that the possibility of having ad hoc discussions, proposed by both states parties and other stakeholders, is going to be maintained next year. In its final report, the Conference decided to “invite States Parties and other stakeholders to raise other issues that provide challenges in the practical implementation of the Treaty at the national level for an ad hoc discussion in the WGETI [Working Group on Effective Treaty Implementation] in accordance with the relevant CSP9 decision.”
Regardless of states’ motivations for supporting the ad hoc discussions—which can at times be related to them wanting to use compliance as a political “beating stick” against each other, rather than actually holding each other accountable—this move is a welcome step towards recuperating the Treaty’s credibility and enforce Articles 6 and 7.
In addition, the Conference adopted several other initiatives under the scope of the Working Group on Treaty Implementation (WGETI):
- Having a discussion during CSP12 Working Group sessions on “national control system relating to brokering” and “risk assessment (covering Articles 6&7);”
- Discuss the challenges related to the scope of the Treaty (categories of conventional arms) and the establishment and maintenance of a national control list, including the handling of parts and components;
- Continue the discussions on the role of industry, including about a list of reference materials for industry actors and on possible draft elements for a voluntary guidance document linking the human rights and IHL due diligence responsibilities of industry actors; and
- Discuss useful elements for developing or strengthening inter-agency cooperation to be integrated in the Voluntary Basic Guide to Establishing a National Control System.
Advancing the integration of gender perspectives
Another welcome development is the adoption of the decision to create gender focal points for the ATT. The proposal submitted by Mexico, which received overwhelming support by states parties, establishes that gender focal points shall be identified by the Management Committee for a term of two years. Their purpose will be to “promote the systematic integration of gender perspectives across all ATT processes to support the Treaty’s effective implementation, including by adopting a human rights-based approach that recognizes the differentiated impacts of armed violence based on gender.”
Additionally, the Conference also adopted other initiatives related to gender, namely to: (i) discuss the integration of the proposed additional guidance on the implementation of Article 7(4) of the Treaty in the relevant sections of the Voluntary Guide on Implementing Articles 6 and 7 of the ATT; and (ii) release the sections of the Voluntary Guide to Implementing Articles 6 and 7 of the ATT that address the implementation of Article 7 (4) as a separate fact sheet to highlight the importance of assessing the risk of conventional arms being used to commit gender-based violence (GBV) or violence against women and children.
These are important developments that will contribute to the implementation of Article 7(4), as well as the implementation of commitments and decisions adopted in previous CSPs, including CSP5, CSP9, and CSP10. In addition to expressing support for these measures, delegations raised various other gender-related issues in their statements.
Gender-based violence
Ms. Mélanie Régimbal, speaking on behalf of the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, noted that the risk of conventional weapons being used to perpetrate GBV and violence against women and children remains a pressing concern. Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Chile, Côte d’Ivoire, Germany, Mexico, Norway, Netherlands, Spain, and many others made similar remarks linking conventional weapons and GBV.
Austria noted that research by the UN Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) shows that between 70–90 per cent of all incidents of conflict-related sexual violence involves weapons and firearms, strongly linking efforts to prevent such violence with the ATT. Colombia and Luxembourg also highlighted the harmful and disproportionate impact of armed conflict on women and girls. The Central African Republic, Chile, and Italy emphasised the importance of Article 7(4) of the ATT in helping eliminate violence against women. Chile called on all states parties to implement all necessary measures to guarantee the full denial of arms exports if there is a risk that these arms will be used to commit or facilitate GBV or violence against women and children. Luxembourg also highlighted this provision. The Central African Republic suggested establishing a database to allow states to share information on GBV.
Austria further emphasised that LGBTIQ rights should be part of the debate on GBV. The Netherlands said that armed violence affects all genders differently and responses must reflect these realities. Comoros emphasised that women, young girls, and gender minorities are often affected by firearm-related violence. Guinea affirmed that for the ATT to be truly effective in reducing human suffering, it must incorporate a gender perspective that recognises the unique challenges faced by women, children, and marginalised groups.
Gender mainstreaming in the ATT and beyond
Many delegations, including Colombia, Finland, Ireland, and Norway, reiterated the importance of gender-responsive approaches to disarmament and arms control. Sweden added that a gender-responsive approaches to arms control, including the prevention of GBV, is essential to achieving the Treaty’s objective and purpose. The Netherlands said that integrating a gender perspective across all aspects of ATT implementation is crucial.
The UK also supported efforts for integrating gender throughout the implementation of the ATT, not just of Article 7(4). Similarly, South Africa also emphasised that the cross-cutting nature of gender means that its consideration goes beyond Article 7(4). In particular, it noted that acts of GBV that amount to crimes against humanity or war crimes could engage the prohibitions outlined in Article 6.
Argentina noted it understands gender as it was agreed on the Rome Statute and emphasised that Argentina’s commitment to the rights of the women is “sustained in time and is as shown in our legislation and domestic practices that go beyond international standards.”
Participation and national implementation
Canada, Colombia, Netherlands, Maat for Peace, and others supported the full, equal, and meaningful participation of women in the ATT. The Gender Equality Network for Small Arms Control (GENSAC) called for equal representation of women in official delegations, ATT decision-making bodies, and follow-up mechanisms.
The representative of Liberia shared about her experience as a women leading arms control efforts in the country. She emphasised the urgency of mainstreaming gender perspectives in national implementation of the ATT. Guatemala also shared about its experience in mainstreaming gender nationally. GENSAC called for inclusive national monitoring mechanisms involving women’s and community-based organisations. It also called for sustainable funding and technical support for local civil society in the Global South to monitor ATT implementation.
Women, Peace, and Security
Small Arms Survey noted that their research shows that while the ATT is often mentioned in the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) national action plans of exporting states, it’s rarely referenced in those of importing states—even ATT states parties. “This suggests a gap in how the ATT is perceived: How do we make it more relevant to the daily realities of those most affected by violence?” asked Small Arms Survey. Japan, Namibia, Norway, Peru, Spain, and others reiterated their commitment to the WPS Agenda.
Regional issues
The EU announced that in its recently updated Common Position on Arms Exports, core provisions, concepts, and understandings from the ATT—such as the relation between conventional arms and GBV, or the use of military equipment to commit or facilitate serious violations of human rights law and international humanitarian law—have become part of the denial criteria of the EU Common Position. The EU noted that these provisions are also now applicable even beyond the scope of the Treaty, to cover the entire EU common military list, also including certain cases of dual-use goods by all its member states. The Netherlands also emphasised the changes in the EU Common Position and encouraged other states parties to continuously consider these aspects in their arms export control assessments.
Israel recalled the link between diversion of weapons and GBV and called for further action, including holding additional discussions on the diversion of conventional arms to terrorist organisations. It said that premediated and brutal atrocities committed by Hamas against Israeli women and children have been recognised by the United Nations and are well documented. Israel rejected allegations of gender-based violence by Israeli forces.
Palestine highlighted the continuous bombing for over 22 months of children, refugees, elderly people, and women. It also recalled the recent statement by the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls for immediate global action to halt what the Rapporteur described as an unfolding “femi-genocide” in Gaza, saying the scale and nature of the crimes inflicted on Palestinian women and girls by Israeli forces are so extreme that existing concepts in legal and criminal frameworks can no longer adequately describe or capture them. Palestine further emphasised Israel’s opposition against the Independent Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) in its documentation of the sexual violence perpetrated against Palestinian women, girls, men and boys. It questioned why the Commission of Inquiry has been denied entry in the OPT. (For more details about of gender-based violence in Palestine and Israel, see our previous edition of the ATT Monitor with coverage of the debates held under the working group meetings in February).
Looking ahead
The Conference also adopted the proposal submitted by the UK for the CSP11 to agree a mandate to elaborate elements of a draft five-year strategy, which should be put to a decision by no later than CSP13. When introducing its proposal, the UK argued that a long-term strategy could serve two functions: first, it would provide greater focus and prioritisation of the ATT’s structures and activities; and second, would enable states parties to better measure progress on the implementation and impact of the ATT. The UK highlighted that other treaties, such as the Anti-Personnel Landmine Ban Convention and the Convention on Cluster Munitions, have long operated with five-year action plans.
The proposal received overall support by delegations and was adopted. The ATT Secretariat will issue a call for proposals, to both states parties and ATT stakeholders, in early 2026 for goals, priorities, and possible actions and performance measures. These proposals would then need to be brought together into a draft strategy, which should be adopted by no later than CSP13.
In addition to the process to elaborate a five-year strategy, the Conference also adopted several other initiatives, including related to transparency and reporting, universalisation, youth participation, and the ATT programme of work (see the final report for details). The Conference decided that the president of CSP12 will be Ms. Tsholofelo Glenda Tsheole of South Africa.
The Conference also decided that the meetings of the Working Groups and the informal preparatory meeting will be held at the Centre International de Conférences Genève (CICG) on 16–19 March 2026 and 12–13 May 2026 respectively, and that CSP12 will be held at the same location on 24–28 August 2026. The final report also includes a decision encouraging the ATT Secretariat to explore options to “secure venues that ensure stringent security standards and are better suited to typical attendance levels for Working Group and Informal Preparatory meetings," following a remark from Canada on Thursday that adding security guards and metal detectors to ATT meetings could help ensure that all participants feel safe while attending meetings.
It is important to note, however, the risk for civil society participation that derives from measures aimed at “securing” or militarising of meeting spaces. Any attempts to limit participation of civil society under the pretence of security risks silencing those who are standing up for human rights and international law, and creating an atmosphere of intimidation and restriction.
Overall, this CSP adopted several welcome initiatives which will improve the Treaty’s functioning. However, as highlighted by Raluca Muresan in a blog for Control Arms, these initiatives are largely procedural, and states should move beyond process and focus on impact. “Ensuring compliance with the Treaty’s core obligations—to assess the risk of conventional arms transfer—is the only way to ensure that the ATT delivers on its promise: to reduce human suffering caused by conflict and armed violence,” she stressed.
The arms trade is fuelling a genocide as we speak. War profiteering is diverting resources that could be spent on environmental remediation, health, education, and peace. In its statement during the opening of the Conference, Control Arms highlighted that increases in military spending over the last year would cover the global humanitarian funding gap more than 55 times over. “If states parties upheld the objective and purpose of this Treaty with the energy, determination, and efficiency with which they produce and procure arms, human suffering would unquestionability be reduced,” said Control Arms.
The current geopolitical landscape reflects the reality that heavy militarised states have chosen to put profit before the wellbeing of our planet and our communities. However, as stated by Ms. Mélanie Régimbal, speaking on behalf of the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs, and echoed by Panama, “Political interest or economic gain must never outweigh humanitarian considerations.” At these troubling times, it’s important to recall the content of Article 26 of the UN Charter, as highlighted by Peru, which urges states to establish peace and security in the world with the least diversion possible of humans and financial resources towards armament. “This is a foundational principle that inspires us for the effective implementation of the ATT and to strengthen multilateralism for peace,” said Peru. Hopefully it can inspire all other ATT states parties, too.
[PDF] ()