Arms embargo are a tool to prevent arms from entering countries and regions that are at risk of political violence. They typically prohibit the sale of weapons, munitions, components and parts that could be used to commit serious human rights violations or to change the balance of power in a region. However, arms companies often find ways around them, through front companies and third country transfers.
The success of international laws, including arms embargoes, depends on their coercive power to change the behaviour of actors or signal disapproval. But stand-alone arms embargoes are seldom effective. They are almost always accompanied by other targeted sanctions, including asset freezes and travel bans, which limit the financing of powerful economic or political actors.
Moreover, the long lifespan of conventional weapons makes it difficult to predict how they will be used over time. They can be repurposed, reused as spare parts or even reverse-engineered and replicated to create new weapons. The level of import dependence of embargoed actors is also a major factor in their vulnerability to breaking an arms embargo. Militaries and militias seek to standardize their weapon systems, locking them into a specific set of suppliers and reducing the options for procuring other types of ordnance.
Finally, the large number of potential entry points for arms to conflict zones – often remote and poorly patrolled – makes it easy for illicit traders to exploit gaps in the system. These include land borders, which can be long and arduous to cross, as well as the ‘ant trade’, in which small quantities of weaponry are transported back and forth between states, like ants carrying food for their colonies.
About the Author
