Introduction: Future directions in small arms control

Hill, Stephen

doi:10.1080/13523260600602172

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is generally difficult to develop international legal instruments in the face of ‘problem diversity’– when an issue ‘is actually many distinct problems – each with its own attributes, administrative challenges, and distinctive political constituencies’ (Keohane and Victor, 2011, p. 13). Hill has observed that ‘there is little agreement as to what the specific SALW “problem” is’, with different actors emphasizing humanitarian, health, human rights or development issues and others focusing on security dimensions, resulting in divergent proposed solutions (Hill, 2006, p. 2). There is also friction within the NGO network deriving from differing positions on the arms trade, ranging from prohibition to regulation (Stavrianakis, 2010).…”

Section: Challenges Facing the Arms Trade Treaty Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unlike the landmines and cluster munitions treaties, which banned single, easily stigmatized munitions, SALW covers many different categories of weapons (Erickson, 2007, p. 2; Garcia, 2004, pp. 4–6; Hill, 2006, pp. 2–3).…”

Section: Challenges Facing the Arms Trade Treaty Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A watertight treaty is more difficult to achieve, since conventional weapons are less easy to dismiss as ‘inherently indiscriminate’ than landmines or cluster munitions. Conventional weapons are closer to the heart of states’ arsenals than landmines and are more commercially profitable (Hill, 2006, p. 2; O’Dwyer, 2006, p. 82). It would be politically impossible for the Control Arms campaign to call for a blanket ban on conventional arms, or even just SALW (Erickson, 2007, p. 2; Hubert, 2000, p. 48).…”

Section: Challenges Facing the Arms Trade Treaty Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some campaigners are considering a similar two‐track process for SALW. The ATT could form the minimum standard agreed by the great powers, while middle and small powers create an additional treaty with higher standards that they opt into, creating upward normative pressure (this idea is hinted at by Hill, 2006, p. 3). However, as noted above, the experience of the landmine and cluster munitions campaigns may not be completely transferable and, as one SALW activist remarked to us, the two‐track approach is currently ‘the strategy that dares not say its name’.…”

Section: Challenges Facing the Arms Trade Treaty Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SALW caused an ‘overwhelming majority’ of casualties in post‐Second World War conflicts (Krause, 2001, p. 8). From 1995 to 2005, up to three‐quarters of serious human rights violations have involved the use of SALW (Control Arms, 2006b, p. 4; Hill, 2006, p. 1). Crucially, there are no comprehensive regulations governing global SALW transfers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Globalization and the Kalashnikov: Public–Private Networks in the Trafficking and Control of Small Arms

Bolton¹,

Sakamoto²,

Griffiths³

2012

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article will show how trends of globalization have transformed both the proliferation of and efforts to control small arms and light weapons (SALW). We first examine how the distribution of small arms has become more diffused, moving away from a state‐centric model of ‘arms transfers’ to circulations of SALW through outsourced networks comprising a myriad of public and private actors. We then show how the post‐Cold War international environment has allowed progressive norm entrepreneurs like middle powers and NGOs greater voice in determining SALW policy. Simultaneously, however, it has also allowed great power states and defense companies to benefit from the legitimacy of associating with human rights groups, ‘capturing’ the SALW policy process, particularly the Arms Trade Treaty, in a way that protects their interests. Efforts to transfer, exchange and control small arms and light weapons are thus indicative of wider global political processes in which power is diffused through multilayered networks and complexes. Exploring the policy implications, we argue that these networks enable actors to augment their power and capacity through alliances with other agents, but simultaneously constrain their scope of action and ability to control the process. This makes it more difficult for actors representing the public interest to override those acting in private or particularist interests. Policy Implications Globalization makes it more difficult for those making policy in the public interest to constrain and resist capture by private interests, or to control the direction of the process when there are many actors involved. Therefore: Global policy success requires a thorough understanding of how to navigate and operate in multilevel, multi‐actor, multinational and multi‐scale networks. Global policy makers and activists need to become increasingly familiar with operating strategically in networks and complexes of public and private actors, selecting allies and contractors who share values and interests that are consistent with the intended policy outcomes. A smaller, more coherent campaign network can sometimes be more effective and mobilize more strategically than a broad‐based, diffused coalition. Rather than focusing simply on state‐centric treaties, global policy making around multifaceted issues like SALW proliferation may be better served by created multilayered ‘regime complexes’, incorporating a network of mutually reinforcing institutions, norms, treaties, programs, embargoes and campaigns.

show abstract

Section: Challenges Facing the Arms Trade Treaty Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges Facing the Arms Trade Treaty Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges Facing the Arms Trade Treaty Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges Facing the Arms Trade Treaty Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Globalization and the Kalashnikov: Public–Private Networks in the Trafficking and Control of Small Arms

Bolton¹,

Sakamoto²,

Griffiths³

2012

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Deterring the Undeterrable: Coercion, Denial, and Delegitimization in Counterterrorism

Wilner

2011

Journal of Strategic Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Issue-adoption and campaign structure in transnational advocacy campaigns: a longitudinal network analysis

Eilstrup-Sangiovanni

Breen

2023

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do transnational actors choose to campaign on specific issues, and why do they launch campaigns when they do? In this article, we theorize the membership, focus, timing and strategies used in transnational advocacy campaigns as a function of long-standing professional networks between NGOs and individual professional campaigners. Unlike previous scholarship that highlights the role of powerful ‘gatekeeper’ organizations whose central position within transnational issue-networks allows them to promote or block specific issues, we draw on recent work in organizational sociology to bring into focus a wider transnational community of individuals and organizations whose competition for professional growth and ‘issue-control’ is crucial in defining the transnational advocacy agenda. In doing so, we qualify existing notions of agenda-setting and gatekeeping in International Relations (IR) scholarship. To illustrate our theory we use a longitudinal network analysis approach, alongside extensive interviews and analysis of primary non-governmental organization (NGO) sources. Our empirical focus is on transnational disarmament advocacy. However, our theoretical analysis has implications for transnational advocacy more broadly.

show abstract

Introduction: Future directions in small arms control

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Globalization and the Kalashnikov: Public–Private Networks in the Trafficking and Control of Small Arms

Globalization and the Kalashnikov: Public–Private Networks in the Trafficking and Control of Small Arms

Deterring the Undeterrable: Coercion, Denial, and Delegitimization in Counterterrorism

Issue-adoption and campaign structure in transnational advocacy campaigns: a longitudinal network analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About