UN Arms Embargoes

[Jedburgh]

SIPRI, 26 Nov 07:

UN Arms Embargoes: Their Impact on Arms Flows and Target Behavior

This report is the first analysis of the 27 UN arms embargoes imposed since 1990. UN arms embargoes have been criticized as having a limited impact on reducing arms flows to their targets or improving target behaviour. This report reassesses UN embargoes and their effect on arms flows and target behaviour. In particular, it considers the effect of the Interlaken (1999–2001), Bonn–Berlin (2000–2001) and Stockholm (2001–2003) processes, which offered a range of proposals for developing the focus and implementation of UN arms embargoes,

This report proposes a typology of peace and security goals that arms embargoes might help to achieve. Recommendations for strengthening the implementation of arms embargoes are addressed to the UN Security Council in particular, but are of potential interest to all UN member states, UN agencies, regional organizations, nongovernmental organizations, researchers and the concerned general public.

Case Study: Rwanda 1994-Present

Case Study: Sierra Leone 1997-Present

[Tom Odom]

And the French continued to support the killers. The NGO cited below was MSF, hardly a friend of the new government in Kigali. In this case, MSF blasted France.

Resolution 918 did not bring arms shipments to Rwanda to a complete halt. After its imposition, inhabitants of the Zairian town of Goma were reported to have witnessed heavy transport trucks loaded with ammunition and matériel making their way towards Rwanda to support the Hutu regime.96 An NGO study added weight to this, reporting air deliveries of five shipments from France of artillery, machineguns, assault rifles and ammunition to Goma in May and June 1994, and subsequently taken across the border to Rwanda by the Forces armées du Zaire (FAZ).97 Further evidence was reported in the press of at least one post-embargo flight on 18 July carrying US$753 645 worth of arms from France to Goma.98 This indirect route via Zaire would have been chosen owing to continued fighting in Rwanda, and because international presence made arms deliveries difficult.99 Although these shipments have been denied by Paris and a French enquiry into France’s role in the Rwandan genocide states that no arms were supplied to Rwanda after the French embargo on 8 April 1994,100 statements from French sources challenge the official government position. Among these was a former consul in Goma who justified the shipments as the fulfilment of contracts negotiated with the Rwandan Government before the embargo was in place.101 While a former member of the French secret service made an off-the-record statement that ‘we are busy delivering ammunition to the FAR through Goma. But of course I will deny it if you quote me to the press.’102

[Jedburgh]

Updated report and new case studies from SIPRI, 18 Mar 08:

UN Arms Embargoes: Their Impact on Arms Flows and Target Behaviour

Case studies

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Eritrea—Ethiopia

Haiti

Liberia

Darfur, Sudan

The Taliban

Former Yugoslavia

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

[ancien]

Looking a bit at the Rwanda case study (before the genocide), again there is only the information of the FAR that is availlable. And that is because they where the ligitimate goverment at that time. That means that they could be hold responsable for there actions. There where a few studies on the FPR part, but so what, they where the deserters from the Ugandan army.

Anyway, all the hardware you need could be found in the FAR compounds, and I specialy express FOUND, because it was all over the place. You could walk over the paradeground and just full your pockets with amo and granates.

At the list the Egyptians turn up again and yes they hat the most 'extravagant' embassy in Kigali.

I always wondered why the Chinees kept there ambassy open during the genocide and war.

grtz