The treaty sets out regulations, but it also says that states recognise “the legitimate political, security, economic and commercial interests… in the international trade in conventional arms.” This is the problem. In a statement to the House of Commons on March 25th, Business Secretary Vince Cable reiterated the government's support for the arms trade. “The UK’s defence industry can make an important contribution to international security, as well as provide economic benefit to the UK. The Government remain committed to supporting the UK’s defence industry and legitimate trade in items controlled for strategic reasons.”

There is no reason to believe that the treaty will have any impact on the arms exports of the world’s largest arms producing countries or arms companies. Signatories, such as the UK, the US, France, Italy and Spain, will be able to continue selling to repressive regimes unhindered.

In the last year alone the UK licensed over £1.6 billion in military and dual use contracts to the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia, £2.5 billion to UAE and £22 million to Bahrain. The treaty will do nothing to stop the UK selling weapons to any of these repressive regimes.

Andrew Smith, a spokesperson for CAAT said: “No arms control treaty can be effective as long as governments continue to prioritise arms sales over arms control. If governments are serious about ending the trade in weaponry, with its dire consequences for peace and human rights, they should immediately stop promoting arms exports.”

The UK government has absolutely no intention of limiting arms sales. Rather, as Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt acknowledged in April 2012, the treaty will "...make British industry more competitive. The Government and the UK defence industry enjoy a close working relationship on the Arms Trade Treaty, with industry representation on the UK delegation". The UK government has a 150-strong arms sales unit and Prime Ministers make regular visits to Saudi Arabia and elsewhere to urge authoritarian rulers to buy UK weaponry.

The Head of the Foreign Office’s Arms Export Policy Department revealed that the Department has reassured countries in the Middle East that a treaty “would in effect implement criteria that are very similar to those we currently implement” and “would not add anything on top of that.” (Committee on Arms Export Controls, 19.12.12, Q136).

The biggest danger of a weak arms trade treaty is that it legitimises 'business as usual'. When countries and arms companies are criticised for supplying arms to repressive regimes, they will be able to claim that they are complying with the Arms Trade Treaty, as championed by some of the world’s leading human rights organisations.

Andrew continued: “When a piece of proposed arms control legislation has the support of the world’s biggest arms producing states and the arms industry itself, then it's a fair indication that the legislation will be weak.”