Current state of universalisation
The ATT, now standing at 118 States Parties, has broad uptake across the global arms trade – with 86% of the top 50 arms exporters and 80% of the top 50 arms importers either a State Party or Signatory to the Treaty. Regionally, the Asia-Pacific region has been routinely noted as a priority area, given that whilst 25% of states globally are in that region, only 9% are ATT States Parties. Furthermore, universalisation has slowed in recent years, with only seven States ratifying or acceding to the Treaty in the last five years.
Factors shaping the pace of universalisation
There are various reasons as to why universalisation has slowed within the ATT, including a decreasing pool of prospective States Parties, challenging geopolitical dynamics, regional security concerns, and misunderstandings of what it means to become a States Party. This also includes a perception that the Treaty only serves the needs of exporters, affecting the incentive for importing and producing states to join or engage fully with the ATT.
Rethinking universalisation beyond numerical targets
Universalisation being perceived as ensuring that as many states join the Treaty, to ensure that its provisions and obligations extend across the breadth of the international arms trade, may be unrealistic and counterproductive. If all states join over the short-term – whilst this suggests that universalisation efforts have been a numerical success – it raises the question as to whether the Treaty is as powerful as it might have been, or if the practical value or impact of the ATT has been watered down. In addition, whilst ratifying the Treaty in itself should be seen as a success, strong implementation of the Treaty is needed to ensure that the States are upholding their obligations from the outset to better prove the Treaty’s relevance and importance in the arms control architecture. Furthermore, quantifying the impact and reach of the ATT merely based on numbers is challenging, particularly given that over time each new ratification will be much harder won than the last.
Strategic approaches to targeted and context-specific universalisation
The strategy, therefore, could be positioned to reframe universalisation as a strategic endeavour – for example, targeting potential regions and states that could aid in best strengthening the norms and attitudes of the Treaty and in turn, the Treaty’s effectiveness and credibility, such as in regions where armed violence is more prevalent and more active importing and exporting states. This, in turn, could involve more targeted and context-specific universalisation approaches that reflect regional dynamics and security considerations, as well as clearly demonstrating the practical benefits for joining the Treaty for the targeted region, or state’s, specific context.
Peer engagement and support for new and potential States Parties
Better targeted support for ratification, accession and implementation, both through the VTF and through more informal means, for potential and new States Parties could ensure a holistic approach so that states are supported to not only join, but to enact the Treaty’s provisions and obligations without delay. Peer-to-peer engagement is important in this regard, particularly within regions or states with similar profiles (importers, exporters, producers etc.) where states may share similar challenges, or amongst new and potential States Parties to share experiences on ratification. By sharing experiences not only on ratification, but also implementation, this ensures that the ATT remains relevant to all States irrespective of their status or profile, further bolstering the ATT’s utility to all states and sustaining engagement and support from pre-ratification and beyond. The strategy, therefore, could support more purposeful engagement by linking universalisation more clearly to implementation support, practical benefits and the Treaty’s credibility.