Statements on an Arms Trade Treaty from the UN Conference

Here is a list of statements. Grouped by individual states, regional groups statements, international and regional organizations and NGOs.

Note: All links below are pdf

Australia: Australian National Statement for the Armsa Trade Treaty

Austria: Permanent Mission of Austria to the United Nations

Belarus: Belarus Mission

Brazil: Permanent Representative of Brazil to the Conference of Disarmament

Canada: Statement by Canada

Chile: Chilean Statement on the Conference of Disarmament

China: Statement by the Chinese Delegation

Costa Rica: Permanent Mission Of Costa Rica to the United Nations

Côte d'Ivoire: Permanent Mission Of Cote d'lvoire to the United Nations

Cuba: Permanent Mission of Cuba to the United Nations

Czech Republic: Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Democratic People's Republic of Korea: Permanent Mission to the United Nations

Dominican Republic: Permanent Mission to the United Nations

Denmark: Permanent Representative of Denmark

Ecuador: Permanent Mission to the United Nations

Egypt: Permanent Mission to the United Nations

The rest of the statements can be seen here.

Can you save me some time and tell me what they have in common?

reply to post by Daedal


Hmmmmmm, not one peep from the U.S. on this! Could it be they are covering their sorry a## by not making a statement?

reply to post by seeker1963


The United States made a joint statement in 2011 here.

Pay very close attention to one particular sentence:

Our countries agree that our document is not a disarmament treaty nor should it affect the legitimate arms trade or a state's legitimate right to self-defence.

This continuing, stupid, ill-informed argument that the 'blue helmets' are coming for your guns should stop. Obama's not going to take them, the UN is not going to take them. The only people telling you that are the ones that want you to spend money on guns. The NRA and Wayne LaPierre, whom I guarantee has stock in gun manufacturing companies who've seen their wealth explode over the past three years.

They want your money and they want to scare you into spending it.

reply to post by links234

The United States made a joint statement in 2011 here.

Pay very close attention to one particular sentence:

Our countries agree that our document is not a disarmament treaty nor should it affect the legitimate arms trade or a state's legitimate right to self-defence.


This continuing, stupid, ill-informed argument that the 'blue helmets' are coming for your guns should stop. Obama's not going to take them, the UN is not going to take them. The only people telling you that are the ones that want you to spend money on guns. The NRA and Wayne LaPierre, whom I guarantee has stock in gun manufacturing companies who've seen their wealth explode over the past three years.

They want your money and they want to scare you into spending it.

I hope you are right! I really do.....but we will see soon I guess won't we?

While you wait for Official Statements from the US, here is some discussion that should give an indication of what you could expect. I'm posting this here because all of the other current threads on the Arms Trade Treaty have little fact, and lots of wild speculation. Hopefully your thread does not get sidetracked and remains on topic.

Thomas Countryman Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation

Second, let me be clear once more on the question of domestic transfers. The Treaty must not touch on domestic transfers or ownership. The United States has received widespread international support for this oft-repeated position that only international transfers would come within the purview of this Treaty. We will not support outcomes that would in any way infringe on the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Positions for the United States in the Upcoming Arms Trade Treaty Conference

US Dept. Of State: Arms Trade Treaty

KEY U.S. REDLINES
The Second Amendment to the Constitution must be upheld.
There will be no restrictions on civilian possession or trade of firearms otherwise permitted by law or protected by the U.S. Constitution.
There will be no dilution or diminishing of sovereign control over issues involving the private acquisition, ownership, or possession of firearms, which must remain matters of domestic law.
The U.S. will oppose provisions inconsistent with existing U.S. law or that would unduly interfere with our ability to import, export, or transfer arms in support of our national security and foreign policy interests.
The international arms trade is a legitimate commercial activity, and otherwise lawful commercial trade in arms must not be unduly hindered.
There will be no requirement for reporting on or marking and tracing of ammunition or explosives.
There will be no lowering of current international standards.
Existing nonproliferation and export control regimes must not be undermined.
The ATT negotiations must have consensus decision making to allow us to protect U.S. equities.
There will be no mandate for an international body to enforce an ATT.

Arms Trade Treaty

reply to post by links234


Accordingly (atleast the draft I read) no it's not disarmament they are letting us keep junk guns suck as pump shotguns and bolt action rifles. Enough to hunt but other than that not of much use to a patriot

When I had made this thread containing statements made by different countries from the U.N. conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, the United States hadn't commented as of then. So I checked today, and low and behold they provided a statement.

Here is a quote from the pdf:

"Moreover we must acknowledge and respect that this negotiation is not an attempt to intrude, either in principle or process, into states' internal activities, laws, or practices concerning the domestic possession, use, or movement of arms. Rather, this treaty will regulate only the international trade in arms. Any attempt that will include provisions in the treaty that would interfere with each states' sovereign control over the domestic possession, use, or movement of arms is clearly outside the scope of our mandate."

(pdf: Source)

reply to post by Daedal


I'm shocked. Simply shocked. The NRA told me the UN was coming to take my guns and now this. Who will I believe now?!