Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Civil Society and Cluster Munitions: Building Blocks of a Global Campaign

  • Chapter
Global Civil Society 2012

Part of the book series: Global Civil Society Yearbook ((GCSY))

Abstract

The international process to ban cluster munitions, often referred to as the ‘Oslo Process’ after the city in which it was launched, is an example of a diplomatic initiative in which civil society played a highly involved role. States remained the ultimate decision-makers, with a Norwegian-led core group of seven states launching the process in Oslo in February 2007, and 108 states signing the Convention on Cluster Munitions in the same city in December 2008. However, civil society, organised under the banner of the Cluster Munition Coalition (CMC), was able to influence many of the decisions along the way, both at the national level and within international negotiations. The entire process, from the formation of the CMC to the signing of the Convention, took little more than five years; it has arguably been one of the most successful civil society campaigns of the past decade.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Anderson, Kenneth, and Rieff, David (2004) ‘Global Civil Society: A Sceptical View’, in Helmut Anheier, Marlies Glasius and Mary Kaldor (eds), Global Civil Society 2004/5. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atwood, D. et al. (2009) ‘Learn, Adapt, Succeed: Potential Lessons from the Ottawa and Oslo Processes for Other Disarmament and Arms Control Challenges’, Disarmament Forum, Vols 1 and 2: 19–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, Matthew and Nash, Thomas (2010) ‘The Role of Middle Power-NGO Coalitions in Global Policy: The Case of the Cluster Munitions Ban’, Global Policy, Vol. 1 No. 2, May 2010: 181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borrie, John (2005) ‘Rethinking Multilateral Negotiations: Disarmament as Humanitarian Action’, in J. Borrie and V. Martin Randin (eds), Alternative Approaches in Multilateral Decision Making: Disarmament as Humanitarian Action, May, United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrie, John (2009) Unacceptable Harm: A History of How the Treaty to Ban Cluster Munitions was Won, December, United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrie, J. and Randin, V. Martin (eds), (2006a) Thinking Outside the Box in Multilateral Disarmament and Arms Control Negotiations, December, United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrie, J. and Randin, V. Martin (eds), (2006b) Disarmament as Humanitarian Action: From Perspective to Practice, May, United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrie, J. and Thornton, A. (2008) The Value of Diversity in Multilateral Disarmament Work, December, United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) (2008) Diplomatic Conference For the Adoption of a Convention on Cluster Munitions, CCM/77, Dublin, 30 May, available at http://www.clusterconvention.org/

  • Cooper, N. (2011) ‘Humanitarian Arms Control and Processes of Securitization: Moving Weapons along the Security Continuum’, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 32 No. 1: 134–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keck, Margaret E. and Sikkink, Kathryn (1998) Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, Michael and Gaventa, John (eds) (2001) Global Citizen Action. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn (1998) ‘International Norm Dynamics and Political Change’, International Organization, Vol. 52 No. 4, Autumn: 887–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florini, Ann M. (ed.) (2001) The Third Force: the rise of transnational civil society. Washington DC: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, Katherine and Moyes, Richard (2009) Ambiguity in Practice: Benchmarks for the Implementation of Protocol V. London: Landmine Action.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage Foundation (2011) ‘The US Should Not Join the Convention on Cluster Munitions’, Backgrounder 2550, 28 April.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) (2007) Humanitarian, Military, Technical and Legal Challenges of Cluster Munitions, Montreux, Switzerland, 18–20

    Google Scholar 

  • April, http://www.mineaction.org/downloads/1/ICRC%20 expert%20meeting%20report.pdf (accessed 30 August 2011).

  • Kidd, Richard (2008) ‘Is There a Strategy for Responsible U.S. Engagement on Cluster Munitions?’, DISAM Journal, September, http://www.disam.dsca.mil/pubs/Vol%2030_3/Kidd.pdf (accessed 30 August 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • King, C., Dullum, O. and Østern, G. (2007) M85: An Analysis of Reliability, Norwegian People’s Aid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khanna, Melanie (2011) ‘U.S. Statement at First Round of Negotiations for a Protocol on Cluster Munitions in the CCW’, 21 February, http://geneva.usmission.gov/2011/02/23/2011-ccw/ (accessed August 30 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor (2011) ‘Statement of Brazil, CCW Meeting of the High Contracting Parties, Geneva, 25 November 2010’, Brazil country profile, http://www.the-monitor.org/custom/index.php/region_profiles/print_profile/231 (accessed 30 August 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moyes, Richard and Nash, Thomas (2011) Global Coalitions: An Introduction to Working in International Civil Society Partnerships. London: Action on Armed Violence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash, Thomas (2006) Foreseeable Harm: The Use and Impact of Cluster Munitions in Lebanon: 2006. London: Landmine Action.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nystuen, Gro and Casey-Maslen, Stuart (2010) The Convention on Cluster Munitions: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oslo Conference on Cluster Munitions (2007) Declaration, 23 February, http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/UD/Vedlegg/Oslo%20Declaration%20(final)%2023%20February%202007.pdf (accessed 30 August 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrova, M. H. (2010) Banning Obsolete Weapons or Reshaping Perceptions of Military Utility: Discursive Dynamics in Weapons Prohibitions. Barcelona: Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals (IBEI).

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, Richard (1998) ‘Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Landmines’, International Organisation, Vol. 52 No. 3: 613–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rappert, Brian (2005) Out of Balance: The UK Government’s Efforts to Understand Cluster Munitions and International Humanitarian Law. London: Landmine Action.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rappert, Brian (2008) A Convention Beyond the Convention. London: Landmine Action.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rappert, Brian and Moyes, Richard (2006) Failure to Protect: A Case for the Prohibition of Cluster Munitions. London: Landmine Action.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rappert, Brian and Moyes, Richard (2009) ‘The Prohibition of Cluster Munitions: Setting International Precedents for Defining Inhumanity’, Non-proliferation Review, Vol. 16 No. 2: 237–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rappert, Brian and Moyes, Richard (2010) ‘Enhancing the Protection of Civilians from Armed Conflict: Precautionary Lessons’, Medicine, Conflict & Survival 26(1) January—March: 24–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rappert, Brian, Moyes, Richard and Other, A. N. (2011) ‘Statecrafting Ignorance: Strategies for Managing Burdens, Secrecy, and Conflict’, in Susan Maret (ed.), Part III: Government Secrecy: Current Policy (Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, Vol. 19), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 301–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarrow, Sidney (1998) Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • The Vientiane Declaration (2010) ‘No Cluster Munitions; From Vision To Action’, adopted at the First Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, November, http://www.clusterconvention.org/files/2011/01/V-declaration.pdf (accessed 30 August 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Tuijl, Peter and Jordan, Lisa (2009) ‘Political Responsibility in Transnational NGO Advocacy’, October, http://www.bicusa.org/en/Article.138.aspx (accessed 30 August 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • WikiLeaks (2011) ‘International Security Discussions with Hmg’, Diplomatic Cable from the US Embassy in London, 6 March, printed in the Telegraph, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wikileaks-files/london-wikileaks/8305077/INTERNA-TIONAL-SECURITY-DISCUSSIONS-WITH-HMG.html (accessed 15 August 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Jody, Goose, Stephen D. and Wareham, Mary (2008) Banning Landmines: Disarmament, Citizen Diplomacy, and Human Security. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wisotzski, S. (2009) Between Morality and Military Interests: Norm Setting in Humanitarian Arms Control. Frankfurt am Main: Peace Research Institute Frankfurt.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Thomas Nash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. London School of Economics and Political Science, UK

    Mary Kaldor (Professor of Global Governance and director of the Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit in the Department of International Development) (Professor of Global Governance and director of the Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit in the Department of International Development)

  2. University of Cambridge, UK

    Henrietta L. Moore (William Wyse Chair of Social Anthropology) (William Wyse Chair of Social Anthropology)

  3. Department of International Development, London School of Economics (LSE), UK

    Sabine Selchow (Researcher in the Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit in the Department of International Development) (Researcher in the Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit in the Department of International Development)

  4. Methodology Institute at LSE, UK

    Sabine Selchow (Researcher in the Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit in the Department of International Development) (Researcher in the Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit in the Department of International Development)

Copyright information

© 2012 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Nash, T. (2012). Civil Society and Cluster Munitions: Building Blocks of a Global Campaign. In: Kaldor, M., Moore, H.L., Selchow, S., Murray-Leach, T. (eds) Global Civil Society 2012. Global Civil Society Yearbook. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230369436_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation