Over the past forty years, âprogressiveâ transnational social movements have emerged around such issues as human rights, the environment, and global justice. Simultaneously, there has been a huge increase in the number of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) active on these issues. In response, social scientists have begun theorizing about transnational mobilization and the growth of a âglobal civil society,â with research revealing the dynamics of activism and its impacts in various policy arenas. Few scholars, however, have studied an equally important trend, the development of powerful transnational countermobilizations rooted in various âconservativeâ ideologies and institutions. These countermobilizations have for example opposed the Kyoto Treaty, the Landmines Treaty, and the International Criminal Court--with considerable success on many issues. More fundamentally, in recent years conservative NGOs have challenged the legitimacy of civil society participation in international politics--even while actively participating themselves.My paper helps fill the empirical and theoretical gaps about transnational countermobilization by focusing on transnational activism concerning the control of Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW). Used in conflicts and violence worldwide, such weapons are responsible for over 500,000 deaths per year, according to United Nations estimates. For over a decade, hundreds of NGOs organized in a loose transnational network known as the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) have promoted an international treaty controlling SALW trade at the UN. Opposing these efforts is a transnational network of gun-rights NGOs, the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities (WFSA), led by Americaâs National Rifle Association (NRA). The network has also been active in such countries as Brazil, Japan, South Africa, and Switzerland, where it works with local gun organizations to shape domestic firearms policyâ"even as IANSA has worked with local anti-gun groups. Finally, the NRA and other domestic interest groups regularly lobby their home states on national policies concerning overseas arms policy. My paper analyzes the strategies of these contending networks in interlocking global arenas. In particular, the paper focuses on the ways in which the NRA and its global network have sought to influence states, delegitimate the United Nations process, and attack IANSA--all with the aim of stalling or defusing efforts to control small arms. More generally, the paper examines how the two networks clash with one another as they seek to influence international policymaking. To accomplish these tasks, the paper blends interest group theory in American politics with countermovement theory in sociology. These well-developed literatures have been little used in studies of âglobal civil society.â Using this theoretical framework, I analyze dozens of personal interviews and numerous primary documents collected from the contending networks. As such, the paper moves well beyond existing political science approaches to transnational politics. Empirically, the paper opens a window onto extremely powerful but little-examined âconservativeâ activism on the world stage. Theoretically, it develops a new, multidisciplinary approach to the analysis of global interest group activism. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]