Arms control in a rough neighbourhood

This research paper examines the adoption and implementation of the Nairobi Protocol for the Prevention, Control and Reduction of Small Arms and Light Weapons in the Great Lakes Region and Horn of Africa. It analyzes the role of the Regional Centre for Small Arms (RECSA) in coordinating efforts across 12 signatory states and identifies significant gaps between regional political commitment and national-level execution.

• The Nairobi Protocol, signed by 11 states in April 2004 and entering into force in May 2006, is described as the most progressive legally binding regional agreement on small arms and light weapons (SALW) in Africa. It aims to close loopholes by prescribing specific actions, such as establishing national systems to regulate dealers and brokers, which makes it more detailed than previous agreements like the SADC Protocol.
• The Regional Centre for Small Arms (RECSA), established in June 2005 in Kenya, serves as the subregional coordination body for the Nairobi Protocol. It consists of three organs: the Council of Ministers, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and a Secretariat. RECSA coordinates implementation through National Focal Points (NFPs) in each of the 12 signatory states.
• While all 12 signatory states have established National Focal Points (NFPs), national implementation of the protocol has been slow. As of the time of writing, no country had adopted new SALW legislation, although Rwanda, Burundi, and the DRC had presented bills to their parliaments. Only Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda had developed National Action Plans (NAPs).
• The Great Lakes Region and Horn of Africa is the first region to attempt a regional marking programme for state-owned firearms. Although a 2008 deadline for marking all state-owned SALW was missed due to a lack of equipment, RECSA has since provided electronic marking devices to each state to improve tracing and database accuracy.
• Between 2005 and 2006, RECSA supported the destruction of 95,072 SALW across Burundi, the DRC, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda, with Uganda and Kenya destroying the highest numbers.
• Implementation of the protocol is severely hindered by a lack of financial resources, technical expertise, and political will at the national level. Many states rely on a single person to coordinate NFP activities, often while that person is performing other policing duties, which limits operational efficiency.
• Ongoing conflicts in countries such as Uganda, the DRC, Burundi, Sudan, and Somalia create a persistent demand for SALW and complicate arms control efforts, as weapons frequently spill across porous state borders.
• The author argues that arms control agreements generally fail because they focus on the legal and political aspects of proliferation rather than the root causes of conflict, such as extreme poverty, political strife, and lack of access to water and pastoral land.

APA

Dye, D. (2009). Arms control in a rough neighbourhood. Institute for Security Studies. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/Paper179.pdf

Chicago

Dye, Dominique. Arms control in a rough neighbourhood. Institute for Security Studies, 2009. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/Paper179.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Dye |first1=Dominique |title=Arms control in a rough neighbourhood |publisher=Institute for Security Studies |date=February 2009 |url=https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/Paper179.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{dye2009arms, author = {Dye, Dominique}, title = {{Arms control in a rough neighbourhood}}, institution = {Institute for Security Studies}, year = {2009}, month = feb, url = {https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/Paper179.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }