scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Kate Stone

Bio: Kate Stone is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Treaty & Arms control. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 11 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The first treaty to regulate the international transfer of conventional arms and ammunition, the Arms Trade Treaty, was adopted in 2013 at the United Nations. as mentioned in this paper, which is a landmark provision and shows that the issues of women, peace and security have successfully moved into the realm of mainstream security.
Abstract: The Arms Trade Treaty, the first treaty to regulate the international transfer of conventional arms and ammunition, was adopted in 2013 at the United Nations. It aims to regulate the flow of weapons around the world by requiring governments to assess all arms transfers against a set of criteria, before the transfer is authorised or denied. The agreed criteria include language on the risks of gender-based violence. This is a landmark provision, and shows that the issues of women, peace and security have successfully moved into the realm of mainstream security. This article explores how this happened, and the lessons campaigners can learn from this campaign success. The article also explores what the implications are for progress on reducing gender-based violence in conflict, and the areas of uncertainty as attention turns to the treaty's implementation.

11 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is used to legitimise liberal forms of militarism, rather than signalling the victory of human security, and that the ATT is better understood as facilitating the mobilisation of legitimacy for contemporary liberal form of war-fighting and war-preparation.
Abstract: Post-Cold War efforts to knit together human rights and international humanitarian law in pursuit of tougher arms transfer control reached their apogee in the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). In contrast to dominant accounts based on human security norms, I argue that a key effect of the ATT is to legitimise liberal forms of militarism. During negotiations, the US and UK governments justified their arms export practices in terms of morality, responsibility and legitimacy. And more broadly their arms transfer practices are explained away by reference to national regulatory regimes that exceed the standards set out in the ATT. Arms transfers to Egypt and intra-western transfers illustrate the way these justifications and regimes serve to shield US-UK weapons transfers and use from scrutiny and accountability. Rather than signalling the victory of human security, the ATT is better understood as facilitating the mobilisation of legitimacy for contemporary liberal forms of war-fighting and war-preparation.

47 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors argue that human security is a form of militarism rather than the antithesis of it, and argue that the negotiating process and eventual treaty text demonstrate competing modes of militaryism, expressed in terms of sovereignty, political economy or human security.
Abstract: What are the politics of, and prospects for, contemporary weapons control? Human rights and humanitarian activists and scholars celebrate the gains made in the UN Arms Trade Treaty as a step towards greater human security. Critics counter that the treaty represents an accommodation with global militarism. Taking the tensions between arms transfer control and militarism as my starting point, I argue that the negotiating process and eventual treaty text demonstrate competing modes of militarism. Expressed in terms of sovereignty, political economy, or human security, all three modes are underpinned by ongoing imperial relations: racial, gendered and classed relations of asymmetry and hierarchy that persist despite formal sovereign equality. This means human security is a form of militarism rather than the antithesis of it. Drawing on primary sources from negotiations and participant observation with actors involved in the campaign for the ATT, the argument challenges the idea that human security has scored a victory over militarism. It also complicates our understanding of the nature of the accommodation with it, demonstrating the transformation as well as entrenchment of contemporary militarism. The argument reframes the challenges for controlling weapons circulation, placing the necessity for feminist, postcolonial anti-militarist critique front and centre.

16 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In 2014, 154 states, including the US, voted to adopt the first-ever comprehensive, legally binding international treaty governing the transfer of arms: the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) came to life.
Abstract: After a complex negotiation involving security, trade, human rights law (HRL), international humanitarian law (IHL) and general principles of international relations, on 2 April 2013, 154 states, including the US, voted to adopt the first-ever comprehensive, legally binding international treaty governing the transfer of arms: the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) came to life. This survey article explores the meaning of the ATT for a key global challenge, controlling the global arms trade and its implications for global security and the legal order. At the time of writing, September 2014, the ATT is almost about to enter into force as almost 50 states ratified it, including some of the largest arms producers and some of the rising arms producers and importers. This signals the embrace of the treaty's momentum in changing long-established practices of an ungoverned arms trade. The ATT was the result of a long journey and the persistent efforts of committed individuals to fill a much-needed gap in the international system. The treaty will be a contribution to strengthening human security worldwide if well implemented and helped by the continuous efforts of an engaged civil society.

10 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The 2013 United Nations (UN) Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) represents what Costa Rica's UN Ambassador called a nascent "Spirit of New York" -a change in the rules of the arms control game in favor of humanitarianism and human rights as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Does the 2013 United Nations (UN) Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) represent what Costa Rica's UN Ambassador called a nascent ‘Spirit of New York’ – a change in the rules of the arms control game in favor of humanitarianism and human rights? Or does it represent business as usual – the ghost of Arms Control past? We are convinced by neither the messianic claims of the ATT's most overheated boosters nor the doom-saying of its most ardent detractors. Rather we argue here that in both the ATT negotiation process and the treaty text, ‘norm entrepreneurs’ like NGOs, Middle Powers and small states have created space for global policy making based on humanitarian and human rights considerations. However, the negotiation and treaty also represent a melding of this ‘maximalist’ human security–civil society approach with UN General Assembly concerns about small arms proliferation and the ‘minimalist’ strategic and commercial interests of the major arms exporters. This hybrid pathway to the treaty's adoption offers possibilities for future global policy making on disarmament and arms control as well as other humanitarian issues.

9 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide a detailed examination of the dynamics of the international negotiations on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), adopted 2 April 2013, focusing on the role played by civil society.
Abstract: This article provides a detailed examination of the dynamics of the international negotiations on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), adopted 2 April 2013, focusing on the role played by civil society. Control Arms – the primary international coalition of civil society organisations on this issue – entered the negotiating process with a comprehensive ‘vision’ of a robust ATT. In a detailed case study of the key areas of civil society engagement during the diplomatic conferences of July 2012 and March 2013, this article examines the coalition's ability to shape the debate on priority campaign issues and impact important aspects of the final treaty text. Its success depended on the development of close collaboration with ‘like-minded states’ and intergovernmental organizations, careful management of information flows and the strategic use of global advocacy networks. As such, the ATT experience offers many potential lessons for civil society campaigners seeking to influence and shape United Nations diplomatic processes.

9 citations