MISSING PIECES - Inter-Parliamentary Union
MISSING PIECES - Inter-Parliamentary Union
MISSING PIECES - Inter-Parliamentary Union
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>MISSING</strong> <strong>PIECES</strong><br />
grammes often spur discussion about the role of small arms in society<br />
and may lead to a questioning of the issues. Parliamentarians can be active<br />
in promoting such debate and establishing public inquiries to gauge input<br />
into new laws and policies.<br />
2. The provision of appropriate incentives<br />
The earliest efforts at weapons collection were often ‘buy-back programmes’<br />
offering cash in return for guns. While these may make sense in cultural<br />
settings where the individual dominates the collective, there is ample<br />
evidence demonstrating how cash rewards can have undesirable consequences.<br />
They have encouraged holders and owners to take advantage of<br />
such programmes to make a profit on their guns, only to replace them by<br />
cheaper or better guns available on the illegal market, thereby fuelling the<br />
black market. In certain situations, cash rewards can be seen as unduly<br />
rewarding violent behaviour, as only weapons holders will be able to access<br />
them. Testimonies from Afghanistan also illustrate how ex-fighters have<br />
been forced into sharing their cash rewards with former commanders. 3<br />
Where several disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR)<br />
processes occur in parallel in the same region, and the cash rewards vary,<br />
ex-combatants are encouraged to cross the border to find ‘the best deal’.<br />
This dilemma is clearly illustrated in the cases of Liberia and Côte d’Ivoire,<br />
two neighbouring countries where ex-combatants who turned in a weapon<br />
were offered USD 300 and USD 900 respectively. Even when cash is used<br />
as a reinsertion payment for ex-combatants and not intended as a direct<br />
payment for their guns, this distinction may not always be apparent to the<br />
ex-combatants. The international community’s learning curve seems to be<br />
particularly flat on this point.<br />
It is, therefore, a positive development that processes treating disarmament<br />
and reintegration separately are being replaced by programmes linking<br />
the social and economic reintegration of ex-combatants directly to<br />
disarmament by offering a comprehensive assistance package to those who<br />
turn in guns. The UN Development Programme (UNDP) and the <strong>Inter</strong>national<br />
Organisation of Migration (IOM) pioneered this approach in Congo-<br />
Brazzaville in 2000. 4 This is also the model used by the on-going Afghan<br />
New Beginnings Programme (ANPB), which aims to demobilise over<br />
100,000 ex-combatants and to reintegrate mujahedin into civilian life by<br />
offering them jobs and educational opportunities. A particularly innovative<br />
example is a scheme offering individuals training and jobs in de-mining<br />
98