A Few Reasons Why the ATT Conference Failed

True Belief and True Failure at the United Nations, The Commentator, July 30, 2012. "What was missing was people who knew what they were doing. The ATT was never about banning; it was about regulating, a far more complex activity. And since far too many nations lack the administrative capacity to control their borders, they also lack the ability to negotiate a treaty controlling the arms trade."

On the ATT, the End of the Beginning

The End of the U.N.’s Arms Trade Treaty – For Now, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 30, 2012. "In other words, this is not the end of the process. It is the end of a phase. No one who was concerned about the ATT should be under any illusions that this is more than a tactical defeat for the treaty—or the U.N.’s broader program, of which the ATT is only a part."

The Problem of the A/B Treaty

The Meme of the ‘Weak’ Arms Trade Treaty, The Commentator, July 27, 2012. "WhatI find even more difficult to understand is the idea that the current treaty draft is somehow particularly weak. Of course the current draft would do nothing to stop Russia from arming Syria. But even if the NGOs got everything they want, that treaty would not stop Russia either. The error of the treaty’s supporters is this – they believe that better-drafted laws stop crime. Wrong. Cops on the beat stop crime. You can have the best-written laws in the world, but without enforcement, the law is merely words."

Britain, the Small Island: A Case of Rhetorical Abuse

The Rise of Euroscepticism and the Misuse of British Rhetoric, Centre for Policy Studies, July 27, 2012. "The real irony is this: back in the 1960s, the idea that Britain’s economic future lay in Europe, not the Commonwealth, seemed like a good bet. But those anachronistic imperialists may have been wiser in the long run. The idea of a Commonwealth economic union, true, is still a non-starter, but the thought that Britain has more to gain by focusing on the growing world outside Europe, rather than the shrinking economies inside it, now looks sensible. It’s a strange day when David Cameron channels Lord Beaverbrook to argue the case for Europe, and an even stranger one when the argument Beaverbrook was actually making looks better than the Prime Minister’s."

Reactions to the ATT's Second Draft

U.N. Negotiations on Arms Trade Treaty Near End, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 27, 2012. "The U.N.’s Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) conference released a second draft text late in the afternoon on Thursday. After initial reactions from states, the questions still at issue came into focus."

In the American Campaign, The Delicate Balance Against Freedom

"The Fight for Freedom Cannot Be Outsourced," Yorkshire Post, July 27, 2012. Not available online. "What we need in the U.S. is not an anti-business agenda. Nor is it a pro-business agenda. Backing business is not the same as supporting the free market, and top-down decisions by a few are no more efficient, and less moral, than decisions by the many. Outsourcing, giving back, and infrastructure are all distractions: what we need are voices across the political spectrum speaking up for freedom."

How to Solve the Crime Problem: Ban It!

The United Nations Drafts a Law Banning Crime, National Review Online, July 25, 2012. "If the nations of the world wanted higher standards on their arms imports and exports, they could have them today. If they wanted to respect U.N. Security Council sanctions and embargos, they could do so today. But they don’t, and they don’t. In spite of the complexities of drafting a text that satisfies everyone’s hypocrisy, the July conference may end up producing a treaty. But it won’t matter to the people of Syria or Somalia — never mind Iran or North Korea. And it won’t stop the NGOs from blaming the U.S. and, sooner or later, demanding yet another treaty. The only thing it will do is give Harold Koh a bit more to chew on, and add another layer of legal complexity to U.S. commercial interests and foreign and security policy. At the U.N., they call that a good day’s work."

The ATT Will Become A Zombie Treaty

, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 25, 2012. "The outcome of the U.N. Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is still uncertain, but one thing’s for sure: The ATT is not going to go away."

Treaty 401

Arms Trade Treaty: Media Need an Advanced Class on Treaties, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 24, 2012. "In answering media questions on the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), I have found that hosts frequently state, as a matter of fact, that treaties require a two-thirds Senate majority, and if they don’t get it, they have no legal effect. Like all things, it’s not that simple. Here’s a short primer on when and how treaties can have legal effect."

Problems with the Next to Final ATT Draft

Reaction to the Latest Draft of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 24, 2012. "In early July, I spent two weeks at the U.N. conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The conference ends on July 27, and I’m back for this final week. The president of the U.N. conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) has just released a draft treaty text. Here is a quick reaction to it."

The ATT's Fundamental Flaws

Five Fundamental Flaws in the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 23, 2012. "The overwhelming majority of commentary in the United States on the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) has focused on the possible risks it poses to rights protected under the Second Amendment. There is nothing wrong with being watchful on this front, but the ATT raises broader concerns for U.S. foreign policy. Indeed, the ATT is inherently flawed simply because of the beliefs on which it is based and the process by which it is being drafted. Here are five reasons why."

The US, Britain, and the Security of the 2012 Olympic Games

U.S. Should Assist Britain in Meeting Security Threats to the 2012 London Olympic Games, with Steven Bucci, Luke Coffey, Jessica Zuckerman, and Robin Simcox, Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2711, July 16, 2012. "The 2012 Summer Olympic Games and the Paralympics will be held from late July through early September in London. They are an obvious target for attacks by radical Islamist terrorists, as well as anti-capitalist anarchists, supporters of various national causes, and other groups. Britain is one of the world’s most experienced and capable practitioners of counterterrorism, and though the threats to the Summer Games are serious, Britain is well-placed to cope with them. But the scale of the threat and the strain that they will place on Britain’s armed forces mean that the U.S. can and should provide supporting assistance to British authorities."

The UN, Gun-Grabber?

Can the U.N. Grab Americans’ Guns?, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 13, 2012. "For much of the past two weeks, I’ve been attending the U.N.’s Arms Trade Treaty conference in New York and blogging on the craziness of Turtle Bay. A number of comments on my blog—and of course many external commentators—have raised the question of whether the ATT is, pure and simple, a “gun grab” treaty."

My Statement to the UN ATT Conference

Heritage Analyst Speaks to U.N. Arms Trade Treaty Conference, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 11, 2012. "I hope the democracies at this conference will reject the naive beliefs on which the ATT is founded and instead craft a treaty that recognizes that abuses in the arms trade stem ultimately from the member states of the United Nations itself."

The Administration Is Wrong: ATT's Criteria Are Not Ours

The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty’s Criteria for Transfers Pose Problems for the U.S., Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2706, July 9, 2012. "The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is being negotiated in July. The framework on which the ATT is likely to be based is clear: it will set out criteria that signatories must apply to proposed arms transfers, and require them to decide if the proposed transfer poses a risk under any of the criteria. This approach is troubling in part because the criteria are likely to be ill-defined. It is also troubling because the ATT’s ‘checklist’ model differs fundamentally from the ‘guidance’ model the U.S. currently employs. Worst of all, though, is the fact that the ATT will enumerate criteria that will be easy to expand in ways that the U.S. cannot control. If the ATT is to exist, it should be based on a commitment by willing and democratic signatories to develop effective systems of border and export control."

UN ATT Conference: First Week Roundup

A First-Week Roundup from the U.N.’s Arms Trade Treaty Conference, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 9, 2012. "My own view is that the conference is likely to produce a treaty. But it’s quite clear that all the treaties in the world cannot come close to making up for the insincerity, the incapacity, and a few actually honest differences of opinion on display daily at the United Nations."

UN ATT Conference, Day Four: Venezuela Wins!

Day Four: As ATT Conference Work Begins, Venezuela Wins the Crazy Prize, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 6, 2012. "In previous sessions, Cuba, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia had all put in strong showings with speeches that were unprincipled and autocrat-friendly, but when it came to crazy, Venezuela lapped the field with a speech that will be tough to beat. In a lengthy rant attacking the “maturity” of the assembled nations, it denounced the “imperial powers” for arming the Libyan rebels who overthrew Muammar Qadhafi, demanded that the world look seriously at controlling the “imperialists” (i.e., the U.S.) who had nuclear weapons, condemned foreign aid providers for insisting on the “downsizing” of governments, and stated that it needed arms to deal with internal threats (i.e., to continue to oppress its own population."

UN ATT Conference, Day Three, Part Two: The US Speaks

Day Three: At the Arms Trade Treaty Conference, the U.S. Speaks, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 6, 2012. "The U.S. and the rest of the P5 want an ATT that is based fundamentally on “effective systems [of national control] based on common international standards,” with authority for approving transfers remaining the right and responsibility of sovereign nations. The scope of the treaty should be as broad as possible—so long as it is practical. An Implementation Support Unit in the U.N. “could” be created to facilitate information exchange, match needs for foreign aid with those supplying it, and “promote the value” of the ATT."

UN ATT Conference, Day Three: The Supervillains Attack!

Day Three: At the ATT, the International League of Supervillains Speaks, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 5, 2012. "Immediately, the objections from the International League of Supervillains came fast and furious: from Iran (which complained about visa issues and opposed having meetings in parallel), Algeria (which argued that the purpose of the treaty was unclear and could not understand why so many draft treaty texts were circulating), Cuba (which wanted agreement on treaty objectives but objected to having any meetings in parallel), and Syria (which, in distracted and rambling remarks, said the same thing)."

UN ATT Conference, Day Two: More Palestinians

Day Two: Palestinian Issue Continues to Vex Arms Trade Treaty Conference, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 5, 2012. "By agreeing to treat the Holy See and the Palestinians as equivalents at the ATT conference, the U.S. has given tacit support to a future Palestinian bid for non-member state observer status. It is unlikely that maintaining a U.S. presence in the room is worth giving the Palestinians this benefit, especially since the final treaty is almost certainly to be ineffective at best, counterproductive at worst."

UN ATT Conference, Day One: Palestinians

Day One: At Arms Trade Treaty Conference, U.S. Opposes Palestinian Inclusion, Heritage Foundry Foundry, July 3, 3012. "The much-heralded United Nations conference to negotiate the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) launched with a media and propaganda blitz, but the reality on the ground was less impressive. Not only did the conference achieve nothing in its first day, but it never got started. By closing time at 6 p.m.—U.N. translators don’t do overtime, so U.N. events end on time—the best the assembled nations could do was to agree to meet again at 10 a.m. on Tuesday in an effort to get the conference launched."