The Arms Trade Treaty
Updated July 24, 2023
The Arms Trade Treaty
On December 9, 2016, President Barack Obama transmitted
ATT would likely require no significant changes to U.S.
the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to the Senate. The United
policy, regulations, or law. According to the President’s
States signed the ATT, which is a multilateral treaty of
transmittal message, U.S. “national control systems and
unlimited duration, on September 25, 2013. The treaty’s
practices to regulate the international transfer of
objectives are to “[e]stablish the highest possible common
conventional arms already meet or exceed” ATT
international standards for regulating or improving the
requirements.
regulation of the international trade in conventional arms
...” and to “[p]revent and eradicate the illicit trade in
Scope
conventional arms and prevent their diversion.” (Unless
The ATT regulates trade in conventional weapons between
otherwise noted, all quotes in this product are taken from
and among countries. The treaty does not affect sales or
the treaty text or the article-by-article analysis submitted by
trade in weapons among private citizens within a country.
then-Secretary of State John Kerry to the Senate). The
The treaty obligates states-parties engaged in the
United States is not party to the treaty, and the Biden
international arms trade to establish effective national
administration has not yet decided on an ATT policy.
control systems to review, authorize, and document the
import, export, brokering, transit, and transshipment of
Background
conventional weapons and ammunition. Such control
Although governments and non-governmental advocates
systems are also to cover weapons “parts and components”
has discussed concepts similar to the ATT for decades, a
when transferred in a form that provides the capability to
2004 speech by the UK Foreign Secretary is widely
assemble a complete weapon. The ATT does not cover
credited with providing critical support for the treaty. In
exports of replacement parts.
December 2006, the UN General Assembly (UNGA)
requested the UN Secretary-General to form a group of
The ATT covers the following weapons:
governmental experts to
• battle tanks,
examine ... the feasibility, scope and draft
• armored combat vehicles,
parameters for a comprehensive, legally binding
• large-caliber artillery systems,
instrument establishing common international
• combat aircraft,
standards for the import, export and transfer of
•
conventional arms
attack helicopters,
• warships,
and provide a report to the UNGA. Citing the group’s
•
report, the UNGA decided in December 2009 to convene a
missiles and missile launchers, and
conference that would “elaborate a legally binding
• small arms and light weapons.
instrument on the highest possible common international
standards for the transfer of conventional arms.”
States-parties’ definitions of the first seven categories of
weapons must, at a minimum, include items covered by the
UN Register of Conventional Arms descriptions. For the
After the first meeting of this conference, which took place
last category, such definitions “shall not cover less than the
in July 2012, did not reach consensus on a treaty text, the
descriptions used in relevant” UN instruments when the
General Assembly decided in December 2012 to convene
ATT entered into force. These instruments, according to the
another conference in March 2013. A draft submitted to the
United States, are the International Instrument to Enable
2012 conference by the conference president served as the
States to Identify and Trace, in a Timely and Reliable
basis for discussion. On March 28, 2013, the conference
Manner, Illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons, and the UN
president determined that there was no consensus on a
Register of Conventional Arms.
revised treaty text and reported this fact to the UNGA.
Key Provisions
An April 2013 UNGA vote approved the treaty in its
negotiated form. Only Iran, North Korea, and Syria voted
Prohibited Transfers
against the treaty; notable abstentions included Russia,
The ATT prohibits states-parties from approving treaty-
China, and India. The ATT opened for signature on June 3,
covered transfers in cases when the state “has knowledge”
2013, and entered into force on December 24, 2014. As of
when reviewing the proposed transfer that the exported
June 24, 2023, 130 states had signed the treaty, which has
items would be used in the
113 states-parties. The United States participated in the
drafting of the ATT and voted for the treaty in the UNGA.
commission of genocide, crimes against humanity,
grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949,
The United States has an extensive system for controlling
attacks directed against civilian objects or civilians
the transfers of defense articles and dual-use items and the
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The Arms Trade Treaty
protected as such, or other war crimes as defined by
points of contact, facilitating and matching offers of
international agreements to which it is a party.
assistance, and organizing Conferences of States Parties.
The second such conference took place in August 2016.
The treaty also prohibits states-parties from approving
treaty-covered transfers to any country that violates a UN
Cooperation among States-Parties
Security Council Resolution adopted under Chapter VII of
The ATT provides for various measures of cooperation
the UN Charter. In addition, the ATT prohibits transfers
among states-parties. For example, the treaty requires
which would violate the exporting state’s
states-parties to “cooperate with each other...to effectively
relevant
international
obligations
under
implement” the ATT, as well as “afford one another the
international agreements to which it is a Party, in
widest measure of assistance in investigations, prosecutions
particular those relating to the transfer of, or illicit
and judicial proceedings in relation to violations of national
measures established pursuant” to the
trafficking in, conventional arms.
treaty. The ATT also
provides mechanisms for states-parties to offer and request
Regarding arms transfers not prohibited by the above
assistance for such matters as managing weapons
criteria, the ATT obligates states-parties to adopt pre-export
stockpiles, developing legislation, and institutional
review processes which “assess the potential” that the
capacity-building. Each state-party “in a position to do so
exported items “would contribute to or undermine peace
shall provide such assistance, upon request.”
and security” or “could be used” to “commit or facilitate”
human rights violations, international humanitarian law
Amendments
violations, or acts of terrorism or transnational crime. The
An ATT party may propose amendments to the treaty six
treaty prohibits states-parties from authorizing such exports
years after entry into force. After that, states-parties may
if, after conducting the aforementioned review and
consider amendments every three years. Amendments will
“considering available mitigating measures,” the
be adopted by a three-quarters majority vote of states-
government “determines that there is an overriding risk of
parties at the next appropriate states-parties’ conference
any” of these consequences. According to the United States,
“[i]f all efforts at consensus have been exhausted.” A party
governments would “balance” such risks “against the
may withdraw from the ATT 90 days after notifying the
potential that the conventional arms or items would
depository if its withdrawal.
contribute to peace and security.”
U.S. “Understandings”
The ATT also requires the aforementioned pre-export
Then-Secretary of State Kerry recommended in 2016 that
reviews to “take into account the risk” that exported items
the United States include several “understandings” in its
could be “used to commit or facilitate serious acts of
instrument of ratification stating U.S. interpretations of
gender-based violence or serious acts of violence against
various treaty provisions. These understandings include
women and children.” But the treaty does not appear to
providing the definition of “diversion” described above,
prohibit the export of weapons in cases where this
declaring that the ATT term "transfer"“ applies exclusively
particular risk is present.
to the international trade in the conventional arms and items
covered by the Treaty,” and asserting that the ATT covers
Diversion
“both ammunition and munitions fired, launched, or
The ATT also requires states-parties to “take measures to
delivered by” treaty-covered weapons.
prevent” the diversion of covered arms and ammunition, to
mitigate risks of diversion by cooperating and exchanging
U.S. ATT Status
information, and to “take appropriate measures” if the
President Donald Trump notified the Senate on April 29,
government detects diversion. The treaty encourages states-
2019, that he had “decided to withdraw” the ATT from the
parties to “share relevant information with one another on
Senate and requested the Senate to return the treaty to the
effective measures to address diversion.” The ATT does not
President. On May 13, 2019, Senator Rand Paul introduced
define "diversion," but, according to the United States, “is
S.Res. 204, “An executive resolution to return to the
understood to mean the illicit or unlawful rerouting or
President of the United States the Arms Trade Treaty.” The
redirection of a transfer of conventional arms, contrary to a
bill was referred to the Senator Foreign Relations
state-party’s own national control laws.” Finally, the ATT
Committee the same day, but the committee did not act on
encourages cooperation between states-parties in the
the resolution. The United States notified the UN Secretary-
development of implementing legislation, institutional
General on July 18, 2019, that “the United States does not
capacity-building, and other pertinent areas.
intend to become a party” to the ATT, adding that the
United States “has no legal obligations arising” from its
Reporting Requirement
treaty signature. The Biden Administration “is now
The ATT also requires that states-parties submit annual
reviewing the ATT to determine what the policy of the
reports to a treaty-established Secretariat regarding
United States should be with respect to” the ATT, a State
authorized or actual exports and imports of treaty-specified
Department official explained in a June 30, 2023, email to
items. States-parties may include the same information in
CRS.
these reports, which may “exclude commercially sensitive
or national security information,” that they would submit
Paul K. Kerr, Specialist in Nonproliferation
pursuant to other “relevant United Nations frameworks,”
the treaty states. The Secretariat’s role is largely confined to
IF10567
disseminating treaty-related reports and lists of national
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The Arms Trade Treaty
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10567 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED