“People were made to be loved. The things to be used. The world is in chaos right now because things are being loved and people are being used. “- AnonymousMarketing by mere definition is the action and effect of marketing; put on sale a product or give the conditions and distribution channels for its sale. Now, if we refer more specifically to military marketing, we entered a much more complicated scenario.Military marketing can be seen from various spheres. In this article I want to write about the military and paramilitary groups that receive economic and arms support from various nations.The disadvantages of military marketing are deepen the existing conflicts. It is true to say that war is fought with more war, but this brings with it the inevitable death of hundreds and occasions, millions of people. It also brings with it the financial fall of the state. All is affected. Schools, shops, hospitals, everything. This event comes hand in hand with food shortages, medications and supplements basic for human survival. In addition to weakening and even rupture treaties and international treaties, thus leading the war beyond the borders, among many other reasons.Paramilitarism or the creation of paramilitary groups consists of the structuring of particular organizations with education, training, structure, politics, and ideology similar to that of an army. The biggest difference between a paramilitary group and a military army lies in the formality and recognition which each of these groups has at the time of consecration. If of paramilitary groups there is no formal or legal recognition of such grouping and, therefore, they are considered groups of “armed individuals”, In short, they are civilians who are grouped and prepared military by virtue of following a certain ideology.Usually, and by way of synthesis, we must understand that many of these paramilitary groups have taken political opposition; that is, that history has bequeathed examples where these paramilitary groups as the result of political, social or political discontent. However, there are exceptions or other ideological reasons that motivate the formation of these paramilitary entities, as are economic and religious ideologies.It is important to recognize that military marketing at this time is permitted between States, is the paramilitary groups. The resolution 3314 that at this moment competes in a certain way with this theme is considered by some to be vague and imprecise, and does not attack the problem directly. Now if we get deeper in this theme I would like to start talking about different ways of seen this problem such as:Can commercialization with paramilitary groups be considered a non-intervention method?In my opinion I consider that the marketing of arms to paramilitary groups is an act or method of intervention to the conflict of another country. The commercialization with paramilitary groups is an intervention that does not solve the problem, and that can aggravate it, since there is no control and instead of helping the solution, what produces is more chaos and death of innocents.The current rules set forth in the Arms Trade Treaty and UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 must be complied with by armaments-producing states and lawful buyers, so that they are not diverted to paramilitary groups. Acting outside these norms is an interventionism.Other mechanisms should be used under the coordination of international agencies such as the UN to recognize interventionism in the conflict of a State solely for humanitarian reasons.Other way of seen this problem is that people could start thinking that the Commercialization of arms with paramilitary groups is considered as non-intervention method to the conflict of another country because the paramilitary groups have the rights to be intervened when is needed such as the protection of human rights. The country that is intervening on the problem should assume their consequences and continue helping the affected groups by solving their necessities and providing them arms.I’m don´t agree with this because we should see this problematic in a way that does´t violate the actual laws and don’t attempt to the violation of human rights. I conclude that a State in an isolated way that should not carry out this type of commercialization, since it acts outside the international order and the intervening State does not have the power to reach an agreement in the conflict. The truth is that each people has the right to self-determination without foreign interference.Could these actions be justified to support a human rights watchdog group?There is no justification for States to support arms trafficking to paramilitary groups. We can not violate the international order under the justification that is to support groups that watch over human rights. I point out that it is against war conflicts that cause hunger, poverty, emergencies and even cases of genocide; however, we can not support that individual countries make decisions that may affect the security of a country, such as a region or the world.I consider that the sale of arms by a State to paramilitary groups is not the reasonable, legal and international way to support a conflict in a State. We reiterate that adequate international mechanisms must be suitable to solve the conflict.Are current rules sufficient to regulate the marketing of weapons with paramilitary groups? Definitely that the current international regulations are not enough. An easy way to be justified is that if we had the proper laws to this problem we wouldn’t see this problem affecting the groups such as is happening in the actuality. Right now we are seeing deads because of these problem. These laws are known to be undefined. We all must support the effort made by these laws and reformat them in a specific way so we could have a better perspective of the problem and find other solutions to solve it.This is one of the main complaints of several countries that qualify the ACT and Resolution 3314 as ambiguous in some of its provisions, considering that it lacks more regulation. The sanctions are not defined and this weakens the real application of its regulations. I believe that we must all support the effort made with the ATT and continue to adapt it to the global reality in order to achieve its formal application and not to become a mere treaty without enforcement force and legal.I consider that we should think in a possible special amendment to the ACT to regulate this issue, in our view, expressly prohibiting this practice and determining in what cases this type of marketing would be licit under an international mechanism and for purely humanitarian reasons. And thus contribute to the protection of the population on foot, that is being outraged and that is defenseless before the actions of a government that is leaving it without human rights.In conclusion we have that disobedience of the law should not be the way forward for resolve a political or social conflict.Should merchant States be prosecuted for these acts? I believe that there must be a real consequence for acts that violate the international treaties ratified by the signatory countries, such as the ACT and Resolution 3314. States violating the Treaty must be punished for endangering international peace and security.The ACT merely refers the States parties to the dispute to a dispute settlement dispute over the interpretation or application of the Treaty. The TCA refers to negotiations, mediation, conciliation, judicial settlement or other peaceful means, and the submission of disputes to arbitration.I believed that this in practice may be inoperative depending on the countries in conflict. When you have a state with more international power against another with less resources, it is very possible that the issue does not even reach a discussion due to lack of political balance.For this reason, I recommend that such disputes should be expressly submitted to international impartial bodies, such as the International Court of Justice, or to disciplinary bodies that are regulated by the ACT.Solutions To solve this severe problem is have different solution that will help regulate the commercialization of arms from states to paramilitary groups such as:1. To expressly rule that it is prohibited for a State party to the TCA to sell, trade or transfer arms to paramilitary groups, rebels or other groups. To reiterate that the marketing of arms is between States in accordance with the provisions of the ATT.2. To determine the cases in which an exception to the previous prohibition could be granted, provided that it is for humanitarian reasons and with tools, actions and acts arising from a commission of the United Nations Organization.3. To control the illicit marketing of paramilitary groups by States, I propose:• Establishment of a permanent high-level commission made up of countries from different regions, receiving complaints from States and interested parties, in order to investigate possible illegal diversion. The Secretariat created in the TCA must report to this permanent committee.• Creation of a Trust Fund for the development of national institutions for the control of arms transfers.• Encourage each government to adopt more stringent export controls and arms transfers.• Establish a Disciplinary Committee to punish those States that violate the provisions adopted on the prohibition of arms trade to paramilitaries by treaty States, according to the results of the investigations of the Permanent High Level Commission.• Establish strong and severe sanctions for countries that violate international legal prohibitions.ConclusionIn conclusion I have that disobedience of the law should not be the way forward for resolve a political or social conflict. We should find others solution to solve this problem that don´t attempt to the violation of laws and the violation of human rights. I can’t believe that some people are so ignorant that they don’t understand that no one can solve a problem fighting with arms. War equals war. We all should help and find a solution together.