The British government is to try again today to secure an internationally binding treaty to regulate the arms trade.
A similar UN initiative four years ago, aimed at curbing small arms, was blocked by the US president, George Bush, who feared confrontation with the US gun lobby, led by the National Rifle Association, one of the biggest vested interests in the country.
The foreign secretary, Jack Straw, will today set out details of a proposed treaty to regulate trade in conventional weapons, estimated to be worth about £500bn a year.
Saferworld, a UK-based pressure group pushing for control of the arms trade and organiser of the conference at which Mr Straw will outline his plans, said yesterday that small arms caused an estimated 300,000 deaths a year.
According to an advance draft of the speech, Mr Straw will say: "We should be clear that our goal is not a voluntary agreement, or a talking shop, but a treaty which is legally binding on all its signatories, putting on a firm statutory footing the principle of responsibility in arms exports."
Those who flout the treaty could be prosecuted.
Mr Straw will pledge to put the proposed treaty on the agenda for a meeting in July of the G8, the world's richest countries which also include the biggest arms trades.
Before the summer, the Foreign Office will also organise a meeting of arms specialists from all countries interested in the treaty.
Mr Straw will also say: "The fact is that relatively 'cheap and simple' conventional weapons, whether the guns of bandits and rebels, the bombs of terrorists or the tanks of repressive regimes, account for an enormous amount of avoidable human misery across the world, and hit the poorest and most vulnerable worst of all."
He is likely to face opposition from the US, Russia and China.
The British government heavily subsidises its arms industry and, in recent years, has exported to countries engaged in conflict or with poor human rights records, such as Indonesia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Zimbabwe.
But Mr Straw will say that the treaty should be "based on certain core principles which make clear when exports would be unacceptable".
These should include "whether exports may be used to abuse human rights or breach international law, whether they may fuel internal or regional conflict or tension, and the risk of their being diverted to terrorists or other undesirable end-users".
