Comments on: The UN is (probably) going to agree a global Arms Trade Treaty: what's at stake? https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/the-un-is-probably-going-to-agree-a-global-arms-trade-treaty-whats-at-stake/ How active citizens and effective states can change the world Fri, 14 Jul 2017 12:33:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.15 By: George Workman https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/the-un-is-probably-going-to-agree-a-global-arms-trade-treaty-whats-at-stake/#comment-3592 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:05:25 +0000 http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=9773#comment-3592 A robust Arms Trade Treaty is unquestionably imperative for the continued development in much of the developing world. However, as the article states, the progress of the Treaty has been akin to Usain Bolt. History proves that unanimous consensus is painstakingly slow. Does the July summit come too soon?

In my opinion, a diluted, half-baked, ineffective UN mandate would do more damage than good in the long run. What would constitute progress at the July summit?

]]> By: Ed Cairns https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/the-un-is-probably-going-to-agree-a-global-arms-trade-treaty-whats-at-stake/#comment-3591 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:06:09 +0000 http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=9773#comment-3591 Nice, provocative question. Robert. The answer is really in your first sentence, if you see what I mean: that the vast majority of developing and low-income countries want a tough Arms Trade Treaty because they know it’ll be good for development and their security. Important to have a level playing field, of course, with the same rules applying to rich and poor countries alike – and that too a tough ATT should provide.

]]> By: Robert Bradfield https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/the-un-is-probably-going-to-agree-a-global-arms-trade-treaty-whats-at-stake/#comment-3590 Wed, 25 Apr 2012 15:30:41 +0000 http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=9773#comment-3590 It is interesting that an arms trade treaty is of such a high priority for the developing world while one of the largest developed countries, the USA, is continuously looking for places in the developing world to get involved in in wars. Iran, Afghanistan, Uganda, it looks to me soon Iran. Is this a case of we do not want to have a force to oppose us when we attack you, so do not buy weapons rather use the money for development, once we take over and it can benefit our businesses? Just asking.

]]>