Since the end of the Cold War, the focal points of international and regional small arms control instruments have expanded to include issues such as lack of transparency, diversion of weapons, and adverse human rights impacts. This article traces the evolution of small arms control since the 1990s and exposes the ongoing challenges posed by entrenched dichotomies. It highlights three critical dichotomies within supranational small arms control instruments: the regulatory distinction between legal arms exports and illicit transfers (structural dichotomy), the definitional divide between small arms and firearms (definitional dichotomy), and the divergent obligations for arms sales and military aid (practical dichotomy). The article argues that, despite significant advancements in small arms control, the potential of these instruments to effectively address issues of transparency, diversion, and human rights impacts continues to be undermined by embedded dichotomies.