Anti-Weapons Activism and Arms Bans: Why Brazil Banned Anti-Personnel Mines but Not Cluster Munitions

Abstract The transnational campaign against anti-personnel mines (APMs) succeeded in prompting their widespread ban, formalized in the 1997 Ottawa Convention. However, other anti-weapons campaigns have been less successful. What explains this difference? This article examines why Brazil banned APMs but not cluster munitions, drawing on archival sources from Brazil's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and semi-structured interviews. Adjustment costs—as perceived by coalitions of diplomats and senior military personnel—were critical in shaping Brazil's positions. They considered the costs of banning APMs negligible but perceived substantial costs of banning cluster munitions. The article also presents a decision-making model of how the relative importance of material and normative factors may vary across different stages of a decision-making process. For activists, middle powers, and small states advocating arms bans or stricter arms control norms, this study underscores the primacy of material factors.