American negotiators are seeking changes in a proposed United Nations agreement that could limit US arms sales abroad and significantly diminish the ability of American citizens to own personal firearms.
The proposal, to be finalized this July during a UN conference in New York, would ban the export of many small arms and light weapons to rebels and resistance movements.
According to some US officials, the groups targeted by the agreement broadly defined could include the government of Taiwan.
Several nations are negotiating the language of the international agreement that seeks to curb the flood of small arms and light weapons into conflict zones around the world.
In 1997, the UN reached consensus on a temporary definition of these weapons, which included rifles, carbines, assault rifles, revolvers, self-loading pistols, light machine-guns, and portable missile launchers. Most nations appear to accept the existing definition of “illicit small arms and light weapons.”
However, the US delegation has submitted a more focused definition designed to have a minimal impact on weapons commonly owned by American civilians.
The move is intended to appease American hunting enthusiasts, sport shooters and gun manufacturers who fear the agreement, as it now stands, could prohibit civilian ownership of popular hunting rifles under brand names such as Remington and Winchester.
“The problem here is that almost all hunting rifles are of military design. The current definition covers just about, every hunting rifle in the world,” says Tom Mason, the UN lobbyist for the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities.
The forum is a coalition of 30 groups, including the National Rifle Association and several American and European firearms manufacturers.
“Under this proposal, civilian possession would be banned,” says Mason.
Mason says the US delegation is seeking language in the agreement that “is an attempt to distinguish between the commonly owned Remington 700 or Winchester 70 and an AK-47.”
US officials, who are familiar with the UN proceedings but declined to be quoted by name, say the threat to hunters and sport shooters is not as great as Mason portrays.
“There are many different views of what the definition should be,” says one US official, who spoke to journalists on the condition of anonymity. “We have tried to make the definition apply to the guns that are killing people in conflicts.”
Officials opposing the measure also say that legitimate domestic possession of small arms is outside the conference’s mandate, which is to investigate the international sale of illicit weapons.
However, the findings of the UN conference this July are not legally binding. In fact, if just one member of the United Nations objects, the entire measure is blocked.
UN members are also entitled to object to specific passages in the agreement. Handguns, rifles and grenades are the primary weapons used in internal conflicts from Asia to Africa.
The most vigorous supporters of a ban on the illegal transfer of these weapons are members of the European Union and Japan.
The US delegation to the United Nations has expressed support for the measure, but also says it hopes to strengthen language in the agreement dealing with the illicit sale of weapons.
“Third-party transfers are a major source of the diversion of legal arms into the illegal market,” says Donald McConnell, head of the US delegation.
McConnell says that exporting countries must oversee the ultimate destination of their weapons and demand the authority to approve any transfers to other parties.