Cited by 54Defense, Military, and Policy StudiesGlobal Peace and Security DynamicsInternational Relations and Foreign Policy

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The UN Arms Trade Treaty: arms export controls, the human security agenda and the lessons of history

BROMLEY, MARK, COOPER, NEIL, HOLTOM, PAUL·2012·International Affairs

Abstract

The UN conference to negotiate an Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) concluded on 27 July 2012 without reaching consensus on the text of a draft treaty and saw both the US and Russia calling for more time to negotiate. The ATT process marks the latest in a series of attempts to insert human security concerns into arms export controls. The setback in July raises questions about the current level of international support for the human security agenda, as well as the relative power of different actors to shape global governance structures. This article locates the ATT negotiations in the broader history of multilateral efforts to regulate the international arms trade, from the 1890 Brussels Act to post-Cold War initiatives. The historical record shows that such efforts are more likely to succeed if they are negotiated or imposed by major arms exporters. The introduction of human security concerns, as well as the merging of export control and arms control agendas, went some way towards reversing this trend. In particular, it created a broad international coalition of supportive states and NGOs from the global North and South. Yet disagreements over the purpose of an ATT remained. The draft ATT included human security provisions, but China, Russia, the US and a number of emerging powers ensured that state security considerations remained paramount in decision-making on arms exports. The US was the first major actor to announce its unwillingness to sign the draft ATT in July 2012 and two alternative interpretations of US actions are considered. The article concludes by considering the options available to supporters of the ATT process following the 2012 conference and examines the notion that the ATT campaign has become an initiative ‘out of its time’, one that might have had success in the 1990s but not in current circumstances.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-2346.2012.01117.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
BROMLEY, M., COOPER, N., & HOLTOM, P.
Affiliations
  • Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SE)
  • University of Bradford (GB)
Venue
International Affairs
Published
2012-09
Volume
88
Issue
5
Pages
1029-1048
ISSN
0020-5850 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2165265153
Cited by
54
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2
FWCI
9.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Affairs (publishedVersion)
  • Bradford Scholars (University of Bradford) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Defense, Military, and Policy Studies
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Global Peace and Security Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
Keywords
arms export control, human security, arms trade regulation, multilateral negotiations, global governance, state security, emerging powers, non-governmental organizations, history of arms control

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review