Arms embargo are bans or restrictions that prevent the export of weapons and military equipment to certain countries or individuals. Often, companies have to follow strict embargo regulations, especially when dealing with war-torn areas or other conflict zones where the risk of violations is high. However, who determines the exact rules and how do companies monitor their foreign trade activities in view of these strict regulations?
This article explores the state of arms embargoes and how they can be improved. It recognizes that current UN arms embargoes require further reform and better linkage to political processes, especially in the regions where these conflicts occur. It also highlights that the current state of embargoes largely depends on the decisions made by the Security Council and sanctions committees. This is because elected members with strong interests in the conflict, like Israel or Russia, tend to prioritize goals that are at odds with the spirit and purpose of the embargo in question.
The majority of arms embargo violations are the result of semi-legal and state-sanctioned illicit trade, grey market trade, and wholly illegal trade. These violations are difficult to detect because the illegally obtained weaponry is frequently intermingled or moved along with legitimate shipments. It is also important to note that, in many cases, states violate arms embargoes because they want to pursue their own domestic political goals. For example, rising oil prices in 2018 prompted French and Italian governments to violate the Libyan embargo in order to defuse popular discontent triggered by price hikes.