A real millennium challenge: tackling armed violence

Friends and colleagues

A few weeks ago I met Herbert de Lima e Silva, a young boy in favela in Rio de Janeiro. The odds were against him when he was born.

Normally, he would have been destined for a life in crime and violence. He would have dropped out of school at a young age, and been recruited to a criminal gang, dealing with drugs and handling guns.

As a former street child, the future did not look good for Herbert. But Viva Rio, the renowned Brazilian organisation, has turned his life around. Today, Herbert goes to school, he has a part time job as a receptionist

-          And important in Brasil - he plays football. A few months ago he visited Oslo and participated in the international football tournament, Norway Cup.

Why mentioning Herbert? For me he is a living example of what is possible. Changing the lives of thousands of children and youth means changing communities. And that, I believe, is where the key to fighting armed violence lies.

Let us never forget: Every day, armed violence kills more than 2000 people. That adds up to some 740 000 people annually.

Many more are injured and traumatized, physically and mentally, and their loved ones are left devastated, and will often face brutal economic consequences as well. 

This is no less than a global crisis. It is affecting the lives and security of hundreds of thousands of people, and threatening international peace and security. 

It affects all societies and countries in the world, including Norway. But –as it is in many world challenges –it is the poor who bear the highest prize. It is their development that is threatened.

This we also know: In many urban environments, gun related violence is the single largest cause of death amongst young men. 

Estimates also tell us that war-related violence decreases the annual growth of an average economy by around 2% per year.

In non-conflict states faced with high levels of crime and violence, such as Brazil, the cost of violence is estimated at 7.3 percent of GDP.

Globally, the cost of non-conflict or criminal violence has been estimated at USD 163 billion per year; significantly more than the USD 120 billion spent on development assistance last year. That puts things into perspective.

But the cost of armed violence cannot always be measured in concrete terms

-          Fear tears the fabric of societies.

-          Insecurity destabilises governments and deters investments. 

-          Individuals and communities flee, or find themselves locked in life-or-death struggles to survive in environments where the guns rule and where there is no end to poverty.

The burdens caused by armed violence are simply unacceptable – both from a moral, humanitarian and legal viewpoint. 

For my government, these facts are calls for action. As politicians we need to do something with this global crisis.

It will not be easy. When I was in Dublin for the final negotiations of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, we began talking about the next big issue within humanitarian disarmament – and the small arms challenge was of course high on the agenda.

But as we here all know - armed violence is not a thing that can be banned – such as cluster munitions or anti-personnel mines.

Armed violence is the result of intertwined social, economical, cultural and political factors – that only can be addressed by pursuing many tracks at the same time, in a coherent and strategic manner.

So far - our response to armed violence have not been good enough.  We have focused on gun control, with various successes.

But we know that it is possible to reduce the number of arms in a society, and we also know that it can have a positive effect. 

I witnessed this in Brazil. The common efforts of Viva Rio and the Brazilian government tell us that the collection of guns, combined with development and welfare programmes, reduces the murder rates. 

We also know that simply removing the guns will not solve the problems, as new ones often replace them. One million guns are lost and stolen every year. And eight million new guns are produced in the same period.

Therefore, we need to understand what feeds armed violence, and the reasons why people pick up arms.  Only then can we find effective ways to reduce armed violence and create safe societies.

So what can States do?

First of all – States need to acknowledge the seriousness of the problem, the complexity of the issue and the fact that there is no one single way to tackle armed violence.

Then we need to get the facts right.

We need to know more about where armed violence occurs, in what situations, about the perpetrators and the victims, how it affects and is linked with social and economic development – and not least – we need to identify and build on initiatives that actually work.

We need to focus on international law and regulations.

International law and regulations has developed immensely over the past decade when it comes to the problem of armed violence.

The conventions on antipersonnel mines and cluster munitions have strengthened the focus on the affected and the victims of armed conflict. And they have strengthened the partnerships to address the problems. It is important that we continue to focus on efforts to meaningfully regulate the arms trade.

Parallel to this, we have witnessed an emerging international consensus to tackle armed violence as a development imperative.

The Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development; the Secretary General’s Report on Promoting Development through the Reduction and Prevention of Armed Violence; and the OECD-DACs work on Armed Violence Prevention are important milestones in that effort.

Our friends in UNDP-BCPR have for years advocated for the need to see armed violence as a development issue, and their efforts have been instrumental in getting us to the point we are at now.

And this takes me to the next steps in this process.

First of all we have the UN General Assembly debate on the Secretary General’s report on the interconnectedness of armed violence and development.

The date has not yet been set, but Norway will take part with a clear and strong voice, including supporting the Secretary General´s recommendation that armed violence is seen in connection with the Millennium Development Goals.

Let me also mention that the general assembly debate also provides civil society with a good opportunity to bring their voices, analysis and expectations to member states as well as the broader public.

Because if we are going to succeed with bringing more momentum into the discourse – we need strong and clear messages form civil society, both here in Norway and internationally.

Then – the next step form our side is to work hard to ensure that the problems of armed violence are integrated into the Millennium Development Goal review process.

Not as a new goal, but as a variable and critical factor hindering the achievement of the goals.

A key part of that effort is the planned high-level Conference on Armed Violence and the MDGs here in Oslo in April next year. 

We will host this conference together with UNDP, aiming to agree on a framework for practical action- between governments, international organisations and civil society – to strengthen capacities for armed violence prevention and to achieve measurable reductions in armed violence by 2015.

As I have said. It is not going to be easy to push this issue forward.

From my perspective I see three major challenges.

The first is to ensure that the good work done in affected areas by local and national authorities, UN and civil society is better understood and brought to a wider public.

Tackling armed violence effectively is a complex task, but by focussing on activities that actually work we can move forward.

The second challenge is to engage other states and large institutional actors on the real issues and avoid formalistic debates about processes.

Bringing armed violence into the MDG review will not be easy, not least for formalistic reasons. For us this is about adjusting policies to realities.

The third challenge will be to identify and define meaningful policy targets and tracks.

We have learned that the best way to do so is to include affected people and communities into the discussions from day one, together with UN organisations and civil society actors working with the problems in affected areas.

There are a host of other challenges, but I will leave them for our current and future discussions.

I know that it is possible to tackle armed violence and thus create better and safer lives for people so they can pursue their own goals and aspirations.

I have seen it in South Africa and Brazil, just to name two seriously affected areas. Our millennium challenge will be to ensure that more people can enjoy peace, security and freedom from the fear of falling victim to armed violence,

Thank you