The Urgent Need for Small Arms Control

In 1945, over 200,000 civilians were killed with nuclear weapons. Since that time, strict protocols to limit access to such weapons and strategic diplomacy focused on reducing stockpiles and discouraging their use have resulted in no further deaths from nuclear weapons. The global community has recognized the catastrophic potential of these weapons and taken significant steps to mitigate their threat. 

However, while nuclear weapons have remained dormant, another class of weapons has continued to wreak havoc on civilian populations: small arms. Over the past 30 years, an estimated 4 million civilians have been killed with small arms. These are the real weapons of mass destruction, and their proliferation must be urgently addressed.

Small arms, including handguns, rifles, and light machine guns, are responsible for the majority of deaths in conflicts worldwide. Unlike nuclear weapons, which are subject to stringent international controls, small arms are widely available and relatively inexpensive. Their portability and ease of use make them the weapon of choice in many conflicts, from civil wars to terrorist attacks.

The widespread availability of small arms exacerbates violence and instability in conflict zones. These weapons are often used in mass killings, ethnic cleansing, and other atrocities. Moreover, they prolong conflicts by providing armed groups with the means to continue fighting. In many cases, the presence of small arms makes it difficult for peacekeeping forces to restore order and protect civilians.

Ironically, the Permanent Members of the UN Security Council – the United States, Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom – are among the leading manufacturers and exporters of small arms. These countries profit from the global arms trade, supplying weapons to various actors around the world, including those in conflict zones. The export of small arms by these powerful nations undermines global security and contributes to the ongoing cycle of violence.

While these countries advocate for global peace and security, their actions in the arms trade tell a different story. The profits derived from the sale of small arms often take precedence over the human cost of their proliferation. This contradiction highlights the need for a reevaluation of international arms trade policies and greater accountability for those who supply these deadly weapons.

To address the devastating impact of small arms, the international community must implement comprehensive control measures. These should include:

1. Disarmament and Demobilization Programs: Post-conflict regions require effective disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) programs to collect and destroy small arms. These programs should be adequately funded and supported by the international community.
2. Accountability: Countries like South Sudan do not manufacture any small arms themselves. So where did these weapons come from? Who profited from them?  We seek to raise awareness of the impact of small arms, and the conflict of interest between leading weapon-manufacturing nations (US, Russia, China, Germany, Italy, UK, Switzerland, Israel) and their publicly-stated desire for peace. 
3. Enhanced Peacekeeping Efforts: Strengthening the capacity of international peacekeeping missions to control the spread of small arms in conflict zones is essential. Weapons should When everyone has a weapon, there cannot be peace. 

The ongoing proliferation of small arms represents a significant threat to global peace and security. Despite the strides made in controlling nuclear weapons, the international community has been less effective in addressing the spread of small arms. The Permanent Members of the UN Security Council, as leading manufacturers and exporters of these weapons, have a particular responsibility to lead by example. By implementing comprehensive control measures, the world can begin to curb the devastating impact of small arms and move closer to a future free from the scourge of armed violence.