Small Arms Monitor, Vol. 12, No. 1
Editorial: Improving Intersectionality and Addressing Ammunition and New Technologies at RevCon4
17 June 20224
Emma Bjertén
In A New Agenda for Peace, released in July last year, the UN Secretary-General stated:
Small arms and light weapons and their ammunition are the leading cause of violent deaths globally, in conflict and non-conflict settings alike. As recognized in my Agenda for Disarmament, their proliferation, diversion and misuse undermine the rule of law, hinder conflict prevention and peacebuilding, enable criminal acts, including terrorist acts, human rights abuses and gender-based violence, drive displacement and migration and stunt development. Regulatory frameworks and policy measures are essential, but insufficiently implemented.
When member states meet in New York for the Fourth Review Conference of the UN Programme of Action on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects (RevCon4), they should have this in mind and seize the opportunity to strengthen the implementation of the UNPoA and the International Tracing Instrument (ITI).
Six years have passed since the last Review Conference and two years since the last Biennial Meeting of States. While the diversion, proliferation, and misuse of small arms and light weapons (SALW) continue to facilitate deaths, injuries, gender-based violence, and sexual violence, to disrupt socioeconomic well-being and equality and contribute to militarisation of communities, new technologies are developing faster than the UNPoA process can address them.
New technologies
The UNPoA has been criticised for not staying relevant in a world where new technologies are developed in rapid speed ahead of regulation efforts, which creates regulatory gaps. This has become a main concern in the implementation of the UNPoA and ITI. This among other thing was discussed in a thematic expert series hosted by the UN Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) and the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA) in 2023, which concluded that RevCon4 “should consider how to address the regulatory challenges posed by polymer components, modular designs, additive manufacturing, as well as the use of online platforms to facilitate the illicit small arms trade.”
The discussion on new technologies, including 3D printing, has still a very technical focus. However, as the article in this issue by Callum Watson and Aline Shaban from Small Arms Survey suggests, there is a need for a greater focus on demand of SALW. This is also illustrated in a study from the International Centre for Study on Radicalization at King’s College, Behind the Mask: Uncovering the Extremist Messages of a 3D‑Printed Gun Designer, which describes how codes to produce 3D printed weapons, specifically the 3D-printable semiautomatic pistol caliber carbine FCG-9, circulate on the dark web and seem to draw particular interest among far-right groups and so-called “incels,” who express racist and misogynist views, make threats, and call for violence.
As an effort to ensure that the UNPoA and ITI stay relevant in relation to these new technologies, member states will consider the establishment of a technical expert group during RevCon4 that will support the UNPoA and ITI processes. Besides the concerns over technologies being used to accelerate the proliferation of SALW in terms of 3D printing components and accessories, the expert group is also expected to explore how new technologies can provide states with opportunities to strengthen implementation of the UNPoA and ITI, including through the use of software and scanners. Draft outcome document one outlines the mandate for this Open-ended Technical Expert Group.
Ammunition
Ammunition has been maybe the most contested topic of the UNPoA since its adoption. During RevCon3, debates over ammunition kept diplomats from going home during the final meeting. For years, a small number of states have blocked the recognition of any linkages between ammunition management and the UNPoA, even while the majority of states argued for the inclusion of these links in outcome documents.
Ammunition should have an obvious place in the UNPoA, since it plays a key role in using a firearm. Frustration with the refusal of a minority of states to allow the UNPoA process to address ammunition seems to have motivated action in other fora. In 2021, for example, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 76/233 to establish an Open-ended Working Group to elaborate a set of political commitments for a new global framework that will address existing gaps in through-life ammunition management. Since BMS8, there is now a new international instrument containing political commitments to prevent diversion, illicit trafficking, and misuse of ammunition, adopted in 2023. The Global Framework for Through-life Conventional Ammunition Management lists 15 objectives and 85 measures for safe, secure, and sustainable through-life conventional ammunition management. The current draft outcome document for RevCon4 welcomes the adoption of the Global Framework as a distinct and complementary instrument to the UNPoA.
Gender
For a long time, the UNPoA was a gender-blind instrument. The first draft document for RevCon4 illustrates how the UNPoA has overcome its gender blindness. Big gains for stronger language on gender were made at the RevCon3, after BMS6 made changes to the UNPoA reporting template to include a section on gender. The language on gender in the current draft outcome document is based on the language states agreed on during RevCon3, BMS7, and BMS8, but reflects new issues for which civil society actors have long been advocating.
Overall, it seems like states are moving towards acknowledging an intersectional understanding of gender. The idea that gender intersects with other identities and experiences, and that these interections result in unique combinations of discrimination and oppression or privilege, is something civil society has highlighted for years as necessary to consider in order to develop appropriate programmes for SALW control, including those relating to community safety, violence reduction, collection and destruction of SALW, and stockpile management. These programmes need to reflect people’s different needs based on their experiences. The current draft outcome document has some language toward that end. For example, paragraph 143 of the draft one outcome document commits states:
To encourage, where feasible and safe to do so, the collection of data related to the differential impacts of the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons disaggregated by income, gender, age, race, ethnicity, migration status, disability, geographical location and other characteristics relevant in national contexts, including through national reports, and to increase understanding of the gender-specific impacts of the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, in particular for the purpose of improving corresponding national policies and programmes.
This data would allow states to design targeted responses, including programmes related to weapon and ammunition management that reflects people’s different needs, as well as addressing the needs of victims and survivors affected by illicit small arms. The terms “diverse women and men” and “women and men in all their diversity” also indicates one steps closer to a more comprehensive approach to acknowledging an intersectional perspective, although more work is needed to avoid retrenchment of a false gender binary.
Even though “gender responsive small arms control” today seems to be more or less mainstreamed in the small arms community and considered as a self-evident part of the “international peace and security” agenda, there are still states that object to the word “gender”. This apparently became evident in the informal consultations that the President-elect of RevCon4, Ambassador Maritza Chan of Costa Rica, held with member states in advance of the conference. However, the vast majority of states seem to recognise that gender is transformative and plays an important role in addressing diversion, illicit proliferation, and misuse of SALW. This perspective can be seen in paragraph 136, which recognises “that eradicating the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, including by addressing gender roles, norms and expectations for women and men to acquire illicit arms, contributes to preventing and combating gender-based and sexual violence and conflict-related sexual violence.”
The Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) agenda, which was adopted 24 years ago in the UN Security Council, has forced even the most resistant diplomats into thinking about gender. Yet, despite the adoption of some national feminist foreign policies, hundreds of National Action Plans on the WPS agenda, and sincere efforts to advance gender-responsive arms control, there is one aspect that states seem surprisingly attached to and refuse to let go, which is the socially prescribed men-women binary. Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF), the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA), and other civil society organsiations, along with some academic institutions and think tanks, have been trying to bring attention to this blind spot. A working paper presented by Mexico, Spain, and the Small Arms Survey to the Ninth Conference of States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty demonstrates that in countries where data collection is possible, armed violence against people on the basis of their actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and sex characteristics remains a serious issue. Trans people, and especially trans women, seem to be disproportionately targeted. This is relevant also for the UNPoA process. The new language in draft one referring to “women and men in all their diversity” is a step in this direction, but the binary understanding of gender represented in the draft still leaves vulnerable groups behind, despite their overrepresentation among victims of gun violence and civil society’s persistent calls for their inclusion. There is still room for improvement.
Another issue that in the past has struggled to find space in UNPoA outcome documents is the link between masculinities and SALW. Paragraph 144 in the first draft outcome document calls on states to “encourage efforts that explore masculinities in the context of the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in collaboration with relevant national authorities and civil society organizations”. In 2022, WILPF together with the Gender Equality Network for Small Arms Control (GENSAC) and Pathfinders published Men and Masculinities in Gender Responsive Small Arms Control to shed light on and provide practical analysis of contemporary issues related to men and masculinities in gender responsive small arms control.
Exploring the construct of masculinities and other gender norms in relation to SALW, and understanding the underlying drivers of why people of different genders acquire and use firearms, is essential for the implementation of the UNPoA and for saving lives. Despite the fact that men represent the vast majority of victims of gun violence and the majority of perpetrators of weapon-related incidents, it took 23 years for the word “masculinities” to be included in a UNPoA outcome document draft. Watson and Shaban writes in their article in this issue that 90 per cent of intentional armed homicides are committed by men and 91 per cent of victims of firearms deaths are men and boys. The data speaks for itself: if member states are serious about strengthening the implementation of the UNPoA, states must retain the language on masculinities. (See the graphs on pages 7 and 8 for more details.)
Additional themes
The list of issues for members states to address during the upcoming two weeks is long. IANSA, for example, highlights the need to strengthen SALW transfer controls; collecting, destroying, and safely disposing of surplus SALW and ammunition; engaging with youth; setting national and regional targets as well as controlling the civilian possession of SALW. In the article in this issue by Natalie Goldring of the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy, you can read more about destruction, ammunition, and overcoming the consensus process.
It will be a busy and probably challenging two weeks, but even if there is room for improvement, the draft outcome document is strong, so the likelihood of a positive outcome should be high. It is up to the member states to decide.
[PDF] ()