Firing blanks? The Arms Trade Treaty

This paper assesses key provisions of the ATT by first back-grounding its origins and contested formulation before assessing its transfer, prohibition and national control provisions, Introduction The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) was adopted by vote at the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in April 2013 and opened for signatures two months later. It was approved by 154 states (later revised to 156), three against (Iran, Syria and North Korea), its 23 abstentions including some of the world’s key arms exporters and manufacturers (China, Russia, India) and leading arms buyers (Egypt, India, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia). The treaty formally enters into force on December 24 2014 having received its requisite fiftieth ratification (including Australia and New Zealand) three months earlier. The United States reversed the previous Bush Administration’s opposition and signed the ATT in September 2013. In brief, the ATT introduces specific, legally binding measures to regulate international trade, transit and brokering of conventional arms, including small arms and light weapons (SALW). Before authorising transfers, states parties must subject them to criteria established under a mandatory national control system. The treaty prohibits transfers where a UN authorised arms embargo is in place, where there is violation of international agreements relating to the transfer or illicit trafficking of conventional arms, or where risks of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes are known to exist. Where such prohibitions do not apply, an assessment is required as to whether a transfer risks undermining peace and security, potential violation of human rights, mounting of terrorist attacks, or conduct of organised crime. States parties are required to report annually to the UN on international exports and imports of conventional arms, and on the national laws and administrative procedures adopted for ATT implementation

The culture of impunity: What journalists need to know about international humanitarian law

Whether they are nationals reporting wars occurring within their countries or international news media staff, journalists are facing growing dangers when covering conflict events. As civilians, they are protected to some extent by international humanitarian law (IHL). But what are these rules and how adequate is such coverage? The article details the core elements of IHL, its relevance for journalists and key issues of implementation and compliance. The news media profession has attempted in the last decade to strengthen normative protections which are discussed. The issue is viewed as one of continuing salience for the Pacific. The article concludes by observing that the issue of protection in combat for journalists is something that the profession has to confront systematically

The drone debate: sudden bullet or slow boomerang?

Introduction: Growth in the manufacture, military use, and transfer of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs or drones) and their associated systems proceeds apace. UAVs were initially employed on an intermittent basis for search and reconnaissance purposes, but it took the New York attacks of September 11 2001 to galvanise their production, proliferation and weaponisation. Since then the expansion of this technology has been remarkable. But so, too, has its accompanying controversy, both aspects explored in this paper which tests a claim that the drone phenomenon has become a lightning rod illuminating a range of hard legal, ethical and policy differences.Although expansive, the current UAV discourse amongst concerned interests has revealed some conspicuous gaps. Absent are appraisals to adequately link key legal, foreign policy, security, and domestic political considerations emerging from drone proliferation. A composite perspective on the drone question is needed and that is the objective of this paper. After further introduction, topic headings include utility which will embrace relevant security and foreign policy concerns; legality; accountability; ethical considerations; scope for possible controls; and summary conclusions