Against small arms: An analysis of an international network

Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW) proliferation was undertaken by the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) as the next important issue in international relations after the success of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL). This dissertation focuses on the reasons why the issue of SALW resulted in an Action Program rather than an international convention. Thus, this result was considered as unsuccessful by the advocates of regulating the illicit trade in SALW. The study provides a social movement theoretical approach, using framing, political opportunity and network analysis to explain why the advocates of regulating the illicit trade in SALW did no succeed in their goals. The UN is taken as the arena in which NGOs, States and International Governmental Organizations (IGOs) discussed the illicit trade in SALW. ^ The findings of the study indicate that the political opportunity for the issue of SALW was not ideal. The network of NGOs, States and IGOs was not strong. The NGOs advocating regulation of SALW were divided over the approach of the issue and were part of different coalitions with differing objectives. Despite initial widespread interest among States, only a couple of States were fully committed to the issue till the end. The regional IGOs approached the issue based on their regional priorities and were less interested in an international covenant. The advocates of regulating illicit trade in SALW attempted to frame SALW as a humanitarian issue rather than as a security issue. Thus they were not able to use frame alignment to convince states to treat SALW as a humanitarian issue. In conclusion it can be said that all three items, framing, political opportunity and the network, play a role in the lack of success of advocates for regulating the illicit trade in SALW. ^

Altered Landscape or Arms Race? Making Sense of Military Spending in South America

In 2009, South American military spending reached a total of $51.8 billion, a fifty percent increased from 2000 expenditures. The five-year moving average of arms transfers to South America was 150 percent higher from 2005 to 2009 than figures for 2000 to 2004.[1] These figures and others have led some observers to conclude that Latin America is engaged in an arms race. Other reasons, however, account for Latin America’s large military expenditure. Among them: Several countries have undertaken long-prolonged modernization efforts, recently made possible by six years of consistent regional growth.[2] A generational shift is at hand. Armed Forces are beginning to shed the stigma and association with past dictatorial regimes.[3] Countries are pursuing specific individual strategies, rather than reacting to purchases made by neighbors. For example, Brazil wants to attain greater control of its Amazon rainforests and offshore territories, Colombia’s spending demonstrates a response to internal threats, and Chile is continuing a modernization process begun in the 1990s.[4] Concerns remain, however: Venezuela continues to demonstrate poor democratic governance and a lack of transparency; neighbor-state relations between Colombia and Venezuela, Peru and Chile, and Bolivia and Paraguay, must all continue to be monitored; and Brazil’s military purchases, although legitimate, will likely result in a large accumulation of equipment.[5] These concerns can be best addressed by strengthening and garnering greater participation in transparent procurement mechanism.[6] The United States can do its part by supporting Latin American efforts to embrace the transparency process. _________________ [1] Bromley, Mark, “An Arms Race in Our Hemisphere? Discussing the Trends and Implications of Military Expenditures in South America,” Brookings Institution Conference, Washington, D.C., June 3rd, 2010, Transcript Pgs. 12,13, and 16 [2] Robledo, Marcos, “The Rearmament Debate: A Chilean Perspective,” Power Point presentation, slide 18, 2010 Western Hemisphere Security Colloquium, Miami, Florida, May 25th-26th, 2010 [3] Yopo, Boris, “¿Carrera Armamentista en la Regiόn?” La Tercera, November 2nd, 2009, http://www.latercera.com/contenido/895_197084_9.shtml, accessed October 8th, 2010 [4] Walser, Ray, “An Arms Race in Our Hemisphere? Discussing the Trends and Implications of Military Expenditures in South America,” Brookings Institution Conference, Washington, D.C., June 3rd, 2010, Transcript Pgs. 49,50,53 and 54 [5] Ibid., Guevara, Iñigo, Pg. 22 [6] Ibid., Bromley, Mark, Pgs. 18 and 19