THE GLOBAL ARMS TRADE
https://ilokabenneth.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-global-arms-trade.html
Author: Iloka Benneth Chiemelie
Published: 26th April 2018
References
Published: 26th April 2018
Introduction
It
has been widely maintained by states that there is a need for responsible arms
deal policies across the globe that is capable of serving as a tool for
preventing transfer of arms and other military products that can be used to
fuel armed conflict as well as promoting instability across varied regions. It
has also been widely recognized by states that there is need to implement an
effective control on export of military products in order to ensure that the
weapons being exported do not reach unauthorized users (likecriminals,
terrorists and other armed group) (bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009) .
At
present, member states of the UN are deliberating the possibility of an arms
trade treaty (ATT) with the purpose of creating greater control on
international arms deals. In order to support the process the EU is presently
funding different seminars across six regions, and the seminars are hosted by
the UN Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDR), with the overall objective
of increasing awareness of ATT proposals within the member states of the UN,
regional organizations, civil society and other industries in order to help
promote global discussions on the proposed treaty as well as how the treaty can
be implemented(bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009) . In line with such
understanding, this paper is designed to understand what arms deal is all
about, issues associated with arms deal and how these issues can be eliminate
in order to create higher level of peace across the globe.
What is arms deal?
By
simple definition, arms deals is a form of contract or agreement established
between the manufacturer (the producer of the arms) and the buyer (the person
purchasing the arms), for the manufacturer to produce certain amount of arms
for specified purpose. Normally, the general purpose is for state protection or
defense and arms deals are normally between states and states (with some
exceptions)(United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs, n.d.) .
Current trends in international arms transfer
In
1982, the volume of international arms deal peaked. After the cold war, there
was a stead decrease on the volume of global arms deals; with this decline
reach its lowest level in 2002, when the total volume of arms deal accounted
for only 38% of the total sales made during the cold war(Shah, 2013) . However, following
the decline in 2002, there has been a more steady increase since then (as
illustrated in the figure 1 below).
Figure
1: The trend in transfers of major conventional weapons, 1999–2008
Source
as adapted from: (bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009)
Although
the overall volume of arms deal dropped to the lowest in 2008, this could be
considered a short term dip – on a five year average, this stable measure of
trend has continued to rise. The analysis of these rise is as detailed below in
line with the deals recorded in the SIPRI Arms Transfer Database.
Major exporters of arms
One
of the most features major aspect of arms deal is the stable composition experienced
over time in terms of the list of five major suppliers, with only little change
experienced in the ordering. From 1980-1984, the period at which the global
arms deal was it highest level, the Soviet Union, the United States, France,
the United Kingdom and Germany were accountable for over 84% of the total
exports(OxFam America, 2013) .. For the period of
2004 down to 2008, the five major suppliers for conventional arms were USA,
Russia, Germany, France and UK. They were accountable for over 78% of the total
arms deal across the world during this period, and this percentage increased to
81% for the period between 1999-2003 (this is illustrated in the tables 1 and 2
and figure 2). The USA and Russia are still by far the major exporters of arms
across the world.
More
than 35% of the US export of major conventional weapons during the course of
2004-2008 were made to the Middle East. This includes about 207 combat aircraft
and over 5000 guided bombs. Numerous deals from these period were discussed by
the UN in the course of its 2008 convention, and it includes the sale of
Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
(THAAD) antiballistic missile (ABM) surface-to-air missile systems to the
United Arab Emirates (UAE)(Muchayi, 2014) .
When
comparing the Russian figure, their export were 14% higher in the period from
2004-2008 as measured against the period from 1999-2003; but its overall share
of the global export market was roughly the same. About 71% of the Russian arms
deal were made to the Asia-Pacific region from 2004-2008, and this include
delivery of advanced combat aircraft and naval vessels to both India and China,
with these two deals accounting for a significant part of Russian deals within
the stated period of time(Control Arms, 2004) . During the same period, there was an
immense surge on the deliveries to Africa and Latin America which saw an
increase of 200% and 900% within these regions respectively. Majority of the
exports were for Algeria and Venezuela.
For
Germany, their volume of arm deal increased by 70% from 1999-2000 and 2004-2008
with the country’s share of the global arms deal rising from 7% to 10%.
Majority of these increases were the outcome of EU advantages that enhanced
export to European countries, with growth in the European market surging to
123%. Nearly a third of the German exports were made for Greece and Turkey.
Recently, both of these countries have acquired Leopard-2A4 tanks and licensed
produced Type-214 submarines(Amnesty International, Oxfam, IANSA, 2005) .
40%
of French arms deals were made for states in the Middle East region from the
period of 2004-2008. This implied that for the second consecutive year, there
was no outstanding orders for the French built combat aircraft. In any case, it
was reported that France is in an advanced negotiation with the UAE and Libya
for several arms deals(bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009) .
Table
1: The top 5 suppliers of major conventional weapons and their largest
recipients, 2004–2008
Source
as adapted from: (bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009)
In
recent years, the largest consumers of UK arms have been the USA and India as
they account for 21% and 14% of the country’s total arms deal respectively, for
the period of 004-2008. India also received 66 Hawk-100 trainer aircraft and 20
Jaguar-S combat aircraft from the UK. In 2009, UK also started deliver of 72 Typhoon
combat aircraft to Saudi Arabia, and this helped in cementing its position
among the top five suppliers of arms across the world(Caat.org.uk, n.d.) .
Table
2: The top 5 suppliers of major conventional weapons and their largest
recipients, 1999–2003
Source
as adapted from: (bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009)
Although
countries in other parts of the world might lack the modern features of a
defense industry, they are still able to provide surplus or second-hand
equipment, and even newly produced – but somewhat less advanced technological
weapon system like the SALW and related weaponry(Amnesty International, 2013) .
Major importers of arm
Table
3. The top 5 recipients of major conventional weapons and their largest
suppliers, 2004–2008
Source
as adapted from: (bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009)
Contrasting
with the major suppliers, there have been variations in the volume of major
recipients for conventional weapons in the course of the years. Additionally,
the largest recipients account for a smaller share of the total market as a
result of the large volume of minor recipients. From the period of 1980-194,
the top five largest recipients of military weapons were: —Iraq, India, Libya,
Syria and Egypt and they accounted for 26% of the total imports(bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009) . For the period of
2004-2008, the top five largest recipient of military weapons were: China,
India, the UAE, South Korea andGreece, and they accounted for 35% of the total
imports (as illustrated in the table 3 and figure 2). This changes does
indicate that for the past three decades, there have been a shift on major arms
deal recipients from the Middle East to Asia. In any case, indications from
recent data is that the process has been reversed with the Middle East once
gain emerging as the import destination for major arms deal(bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009) .
Figure
2: The suppliers and recipients of major conventional weapons, 2004–2008
Source
as adapted from:(bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009)
In
any case, data from recent years deals show that the composition of the list of
major recipients seem relatively stable. For the period of 1999-2008, India and
China represented the two largest importers of arms across the globe (as
illustrated in (tables 3 and 4). The most notable changes in the composition of
the largest arms deal importer does feature the entrance of UAE among the top
five importers, which was a them rise
from their position (16th) in the period of 1999-2003, to the third
largest importers of arm in the period of 2004-2008(Amnesty International, Oxfam, IANSA, 2005) .
Table 4. The top 5
recipients of major conventional weapons and their largest suppliers, 1999–2003
Source
as adapted from: (bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009)
Arms deal in the Middle East
In
the period of 2004 – 2008, the Middle Eastern states acquired 18% of the total
international transfer of major conventional weapons. Form the period of
2004-2008, transfer to the region were 38% higher than what was obtainable in
the period of 1999-2003. For the period of 2004-2008, transfers in the Middle
Eastern region went to the UAE, with Israel coming second at 22% followed by
Egypt at 14%. Notwithstanding the significant level of speculations accorded
the Iranian arms deals, it only accounted for 5% of the total transfer to the
Middle East during the period of 2004-2008, and the country represented the 27th
largest receiver of conventional weapons across the globe(bromley, holtom, perlo-freeman, & wezeman, 2009) .
In
the course of 2004-2008, the UAE represented the largest receiver of
conventional weapon in the Middle Eastern region as well as the third largest
purchase in the world. The imports made by the country during this period
include 80 F-16E combat aircraft from the USA and around 50 Mirage-2000-9
combat aircraft from France. The 2008 witnesses the UAE placing a number of
significant orders from the world’s largest suppliers and the country seem to
be continuing this trend presently and in the coming years(OxFam America, 2013) .
In
the course of 2004-2008, Iraq represented the world’s 28th largest
recipient of major conventional weapons, and 40% of its products were imported
from USA. Iraq orders 140 M1A1 tanks from the USA in 2008 and announced its
plans to acquired advanced combat aircraft as well as additional armored
vehicles.
The
arms import of Israel from the period of 2004-2008 featured mainly 102 F-16I combat
aircraft and related air-to-air and air-to-surface weapons. Majority of the
weapons ordered and transferred to Israel within this period were mainly from
the USA, and majority of them came in the form of a military aid. Additionally
Israel acquired components for its military systems and weapons from different
countries including the EU member states.
The campaign against arms trade
In
the campaign, arms deal is considered a deadly and corrupt business. This is
because it is sued as a support tool for conflicts and different kinds of abuse
against human rights. It is also considered a waste for sources. However, the
government are the main initiators of these issues across the world.
There
is normally confusion about how legal arms trade is, with a common notion that
such trade should be considered illegal that is damaging the tightly controlled
and acceptable legal trade. In any case, majority of the arms sold across the
globe, including those made for illegal governments that are abusing
governments or conflict zones, are legal and proactively supported by the
governments of the countries involved(Caat.org.uk, n.d.) .
The
arms trade serves to provide weapons for those that can afford it. However,
what the purchasers do with them, the significance of such political approval,
and how the money could have been better spent instead of being used for
purpose for which the government ordered them are not being critically
considered. Thus, arms deal result to more problems than create solution across
the globe.
Human right abuse
Arms
deal bring about human rights abuse in three different ways as:
·
They can directly be used to carry out
human rights abuse;
·
Arms deal increase the military
capabilities of government as well as their capacity to effect abuses; and
·
The sales has now conveyed the message
of being internationally accepted and approved(Caat.org.uk, n.d.) .
In
the UK’s 2010 Human Rights Annual Reports, 26 countries were identified as
being of major concern. In the same year, the UK approved license for arms
export to 16 countries that included Israel, Libya, Pakistan, Russia and Saudi Arabia.
Since the fall of Shah of Iran in 1979, the focus of UK’s arms deal has been on
Saudi Arabia(OxFam America, 2013) .
The
impact of these sales can clearly be seen in the Middle East, and North Africa
right from 2011. The arms acquired from UK were adopted during the suppression
of protest in both Libya and Bahrain. Once the Libyan protest turned into a
civil way, all the major arms supplied by the UK and other nations were brought
to its full bear by the ousted Colonel Gadhafi.
Protest
developed from countries across the region and this left both the suppliers and
government embarrassed; as they became undecided as to whether they should
public celebrate the people’s will or to play the protest down and continue
with their support for the authoritarian regimes. However, the reality of their
decisions were made obvious as they routinely armed their countries across the
region irrespective of increased protest.
Conflict
Figure
3: Israel pound Gaza with weapons from the West
Source
as adapted from:(Muchayi, 2014)
By
selling arms to countries in conflict (be it internally or externally), the
conflict is will be made more deadly and also the length will increase in the
process. If there are tensions between communities in a country, arms purchases
will likely increase the tension and result to a full brownout conflict.
Even
in cases where conflicts have actually ended, arms (especially smaller ones)
will still remain in large number, and this will potentially fuel ore conflicts
or criminality. It is easily visible that majority of the casualties in a
conflict are civilians, and it has increased from over 50% of war-related
deaths in the early 20th centuries to over 90% of similar date
during the late 20th centuries and the present 21st
century(Muchayi, 2014) .
Normally,
it is very difficult to establish the origin of arms that are used in conflict.
However, there are cases where arms originalities been easily established as is
the case of UK arms being used in the following conflicts:
·
The government of Libya against rebels
in 2011.
·
Israel’s offensive against Gaza in 2009.
·
Indonesian military’s offensive in East
Timur, Aceh and West Papua.
·
US in its invasion of Iraq.
·
Zimbabwe in the Democratic Republic of
Congo.
·
Argentina during the Falklands War(Caat.org.uk, n.d.) .
The
ongoing tensions between India and Pakistan now makes South East Asia one of
the most volatile places in the world, but they still get continuous supply of
conventional weapons. The South China Sea dispute with Japan and neighboring
countries is a case where arms deal could rip its most significant rot in the
modern century is the issue is not amicably handled.
Conclusion
The
trend in arms deal is expected to increase as the world continue to suffer more
conflicts and war (e.g. Syria, Turkey, China-Japan dispute, North – vs – South
Korea etc.). However, the major factor behind this increase is the government’s
desire to attain high level of authoritative system of governance (purchasers)
and desire to increase sales and GDP through arms deal (manufacturer).
Civilians will continue to die from these issues and peace will continue to run
away from humanity for their unthinkable wickedness and inhumane decisions.
Thus, it is concluded in this case that THE
WORLD WILL NEVER BE THE SAME, but humanity can do its best to return to
peace by declining war and conflict, declining arms deal and adopting necessary
measure for peace and unity.
References
Amnesty International. (2013, 7 31). 10 killer
facts: the global weapons trade. Retrieved from Amnesty International:
http://www.amnesty.org.au/armstrade/comments/28098/
Amnesty International, Oxfam, IANSA. (2005, 6 22). G8
Arms Exports Fuelling Poverty and Human Rights Abuses. Retrieved from
Amnesty International, Oxfam, IANSA:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engpol300162005
bromley, m., holtom, p., perlo-freeman, s., &
wezeman, p. d. (2009, 4 22). Recent trends in the arms trade.
Retrieved from Sipri Background Paper:
http://www.unidir.org/files/medias/pdfs/recent-trends-in-the-arms-trade-sipri-eng-0-139.pdf
Caat.org.uk. (n.d.). An introduction to the arms
trade: Campaign against arms trade. Retrieved from Caat.org.uk: https://www.caat.org.uk/resources/publications/intro-briefing-2011.pdf
Control Arms. (2004, 2 6). New Report Reveals
Major Loophole in British Arms Export Controls.” Arms Trade. Retrieved
from Control Arms: http://www.controlarms.org/latest_news/export_loopholes_250204.htm
Muchayi, W. (2014, 8 27). Of angels and the
devil: How the West aid Israel commit genocide in Gaza. Retrieved from
Nehanda Radio:
http://nehandaradio.com/2014/08/27/of-angels-and-the-devil-how-the-west-aid-israel-commit-genocide-in-gaza/
OxFam America. (2013, 2 20). The truth about the
Arms Trade Treaty: Debunking the NRA’s lies. Retrieved from OxFam
America:
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/static/media/files/the-truth-about-the-arms-trade-treaty.pdf
Shah, A. (2013, 6 30). Arms Trade—a major cause
of suffering. Retrieved from Global Issues:
http://www.globalissues.org/issue/73/arms-trade-a-major-cause-of-suffering
United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs.
(n.d.). The Arms Trade. Retrieved from United Nations Office for
Disarmament Affairs: https://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/armstrade/
Posts
