Committee: Experienced Disarmament
Topic #2: The issue of escalating arms sales by veto powers.
By
Committee Background:
The United Nations Disarmament Commission was created by the General Assemble under resolution 502 (VI) January 1952. It falls under the Security Council and has a general mandate on disarmament questions. In June 1978 the First Special Session on Disarmament (SSOD1) happened. It established the Disarmament Commission (UNDC) as a subsidiary organ of the General Assembly. The UNDC meets for three weeks in the spring and the five geographical groups take turns on the chairmanship of the commission. The UNDC focuses on a limited amount of agenda items, usually two or three. UNDC’s 2007 session began on April 11 and met until April 27th. The two agenda items were recommendations for achieving the objectives of nuclear disarmament and nuclear non-proliferation; and practical confidence-building measures in the field of conventional weapons. A press release outlining the three week 2007 session can be found at (http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2007/dc3065.doc.htm).
Background:
The arms industry is a global business that manufactures and sells weapons and military technology and equipment. Defence companies produce guns, ammunitions, missiles, military aircraft, military vehicles, ships, electronic systems and much more. Disarmament and non-proliferation remain indispensable tools to help create a security environment favourable to ensuring human development, as enshrined in the letter and the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations. Small arms and light weapons destabilize regions; spark, fuel and prolong conflicts; obstruct relief programmes; undermine peace initiatives; exacerbate human rights abuses; hamper development; and foster a "culture of violence". The arms industry is unlike any other. It operates without regulation. It suffers from widespread corruption and bribes. And it makes its profits on the back of machines designed to kill and maim human beings.
Statement of the Problem:
The war on terrorism has become the main issue that many countries around the world are pouring their resources into. It has shifted the attention away from arms control and arms elimination projects. Efforts to reduce the availability of land mines, light automatic weapons and explosives would have a direct impact on the frequency and deadliness of terrorist attacks. If there was more effort put on the control of the production and distribution of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons it would lower the chances of terrorists making use of these weapons. These efforts are weakened because of enlarged military budgets and accelerated production of weapons systems. The arms trade has not been reduced and the five veto powers are leading the way, often trading to countries that are known to use the weapons in terrorism or against civilian populations. Once weapons leave a country it is virtually impossible to guarantee how they will be used or by whom. In this globalized world where China's military trucks are powered by U.S. engines and U.S. fighter plans might have components made in Israel or South Korea, arms transfers to countries in conflict or with records of egregious human right abuses cannot be blamed on one country alone. So who profits most from this murderous trade? The five permanent members of the UN Security Council – the USA, UK, France, Russia, and China. Together, they are responsible for eighty eight per cent of reported conventional arms exports. From 1998 to 2001, the USA, the UK, and France earned more income from arms sales to developing countries than they gave in aid.
History of the Problem:
In 2005, 40 US firms accounted for 63 per cent of the combined Top 100 arms sales of $290 billion. 32 West European companies accounted for another 29 per cent and 9 Russian companies for 2 per cent. Companies based in Japan, Israel and India, accounted for most of the remaining 6 per cent of world arms sales. After 9/11 many U.S. industries benefited, particularly over the increased demand for new equipment generated by the military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. These policies have also stimulated strong growth in government expenditure on homeland security, thereby increasing demand in the broader security industry. There has been an almost 50 per cent increase in the volume of major conventional arms transfers over the past four years, reversing a downward trend after 1997. The United States and Russia were the largest suppliers from 2002-2006. The Russian arms industry is heavily dependent on exports and therefore it is improbable the Russia will exercise restraint in its arms exports. China and India remain the largest importers in the world. A lot of media attention was given to the arms deliveries from Russia to Iran but deliveries from the U.S. and European countries to Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were much larger. Deliveries of long- range conventional strike systems effect regional stability. There is also the problem of controlling state supplies of weapons to rebel groups. An example of this in 2006 was the arsenal acquired by Hezbollah from Iran and used in the war with Israel and by the breach by states of the U.N. arms embargo on Somalia. Transparency in arms transfers, which in the 1990s saw significant improvement has remained stagnant in the past few years. Source- http://yearbook2007.sipri.org/
Past UN (Committee etc.) Actions:
In 1998 West Africa’s regional body, ECOWAS agreed to a moratorium on the Importation, Exportation and Manufacture of Light Weapons. It is currently being strengthened to transform it into a legally-binding convention. Also in 1998 The European Union (EU) accepted a regional Code of Conduct, the first group of states to do so. The Code covers all conventional weapons, not solely small arms. In 1999 US Congress passed the International Code of Conduct Act, requiring the administration to pursue a multilateral agreement on uniform, strict export standards. In 2001 The United Nations conference on Small Arms led to a Program of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects. The aim was to decide the steps nations should take to prevent the illicit trade in small arms. An initial proposal by NGOs for an Arms Trade Treaty was also circulated with strong backing by many national and international lawyers and government experts. In November 2003, in the Americas, the OAS agreed to a Model Regulations for the Control of Brokers of Firearms, their Parts, Components and Ammunition, applying a detailed set of transfer criteria based on international law to control arms brokering. In April 2003, 11 countries from the Great Lakes and Horn of Africa region adopted the Nairobi Protocol for the Prevention, Control and Reduction of SALW. In October 2006, the first steps were taken at the United Nations towards a global Arms Trade Treaty. In December 2006, 153 governments voted in favour of a UN General Assembly resolution towards creation of an international arms trade treaty; the USA was the only country that voted against. At the July 2006 UN Small Arms Review Conference the USA also opposed expansion of the UN Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons.
Case Study:
A primarily Western-sponsored Security Council resolution currently under negotiation, and aimed at punishing Iran for its nuclear enrichment programme, is unlikely to include an arms embargo because of opposition from Russia, and to a lesser extent from China. The reason: the Russian Federation, which shares veto powers with the United States, France, Britain and China, is one of the primary arms suppliers to Iran and accounts for billions of dollars worth of military exports. An arms embargo is very unlikely. Just as much as Washington is protective of its political and military relationship with Israel, the Russians are equally protective of their economic and military relationship with Iran. If you try to impose military sanctions on Israel, the United States will exercise its veto, and if you try to do the same to Iran, the Russians will veto it.
Proposed Solutions:
Some of the recommendations put forward by Amnesty include the following:
- All countries should include brokering, transport, and dealing in weaponry in their national laws, including coverage of these activities when engaged in by their own citizens;
- Screening of brokers, shippers, and dealers every two years to determine whether they have violated laws relating to arms exports, trafficking, or money laundering, at which point their licenses should be revoked;
- Annual reports naming all brokers, shippers, and other transporters of arms, including an indication of what type of documentation they are using to legitimate their activities.
Global Arms Treaty:
Given the unwillingness of many UN member states to even endorse binding measures for the much smaller the Arms Trade Treaty is clearly a long-term undertaking. A global Arms Trade Treaty is desperately needed now. It would create legally binding arms controls and ensure that all governments control arms to the same basic international standards. In short, it would help stop weapons falling into the hands of indiscriminate killers and human rights abusers. The measure would close loopholes in existing laws which mean guns still end up in conflict zones despite arms embargoes and export controls. It could also stop the supply of weapons to countries whose development is being hampered by arms spending. Only the US - a major arms manufacturer - voted against the treaty, saying it wanted to rely on existing agreements. A total of 139 states voted for the motion. There were 24 abstentions. Major weapons manufacturers such as Britain, France and Germany voted to begin work on the treaty, as did major emerging arms exporters Bulgaria and Ukraine. Russia and China, also major arms manufacturers, were among the countries to abstain
Questions a Resolution Must Answer:
How do you stop arms transfers that will be used for serious violations of human rights of international humanitarian law?
How do you regulate the global arms trade when the interests of the five veto powers come into conflict?
How do you make the arms trade more transparent?
Is it possible to create a binding arms trade treaty?
Bloc Positions:
Russia: From 2002-2006, Russia was one of the two largest arms suppliers. The Russian arms industry is heavily dependent on exports. Russia to Iran is one of the primary arms suppliers to Iran and accounts for billions of dollars worth of military exports. Russia also abstained in the vote on the Global Arms Trade Treaty. Recently Russia forged a military and energy deal worth $6 billion with Indonesia. It is seen as a step towards reasserting Russian influence across Asia and the Pacific.
United States: The United States was the only country to vote against the Global Arms Trade Treaty. At the July 2006 UN Small Arms Review Conference the USA also opposed expansion of the UN Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons.
The U.S. has delivered arms to Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. If you try to impose military sanctions on Israel, the United States will exercise its veto. In the five years since the Sept. 11 attacks, the Bush administration has solidified a trend of supplying high technology weapons and millions of dollars in military assistance to allies in the “war on terror.” At the same time that U.S. military assistance is increasing, the poor human rights situations in many of these countries have not improved (and in some cases have actually become worse) since 2001. The U.S. government has also created a host of programs through which these countries can receive the training and weapons to conduct counterterrorism operations, either on their own or in cooperation with the United States.
China: With the threat of its veto power, China has expressed strong reservations over recent U.S. and Western attempts to either penalise or impose sanctions against Sudan, Burma and Iran for various political reasons. But the 15-member Security Council has been unable to take any action against any of the three countries because of opposition from China or Russia -- or both. China and India remain the largest importers in the world. China is also a major arms manufacturer. China abstained in the vote on the Global Arms Trade Treaty.
Europe: France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and Britain are among the top 10 largest arms suppliers. From 1998 to 2001, the USA, the UK, and France earned more income from arms sales to developing countries than they gave in aid. Major weapons manufacturers such as Britain, France and Germany voted to begin work on the Global Arms Trade Treaty. Britain is working with nations including Argentina, Australia, Finland, Japan and Kenya to win U.N. members' support for setting up a group of experts to lay the framework for a treaty by 2008. Britain says regulating international weapons dealing would help combat violence in many war-torn areas and would benefit legitimate and responsible arms traders.
Some questions and suggestions to guide your research:
What is your countries role in the arms trade? Are you a major importer or exporter?
What is your countries position on disarmament?
Do you support the Global Arms Trade Treaty?
Web resources: a list of links:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htproc/articles/20070316.aspx
http://disarmament.un.org/resource.html
http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2007_09/
http://www.globalissues.org/
http://thepolitic.org/index.php
www.bbc.co.uk
http://disarmament.un.org/
http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=442
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/the-russians-are-coming/2007/09/07/1188783425169.html?s_cid=rss_national
http://www.controlarms.org/the_issues/arms_industry.htm
http://www.oneworld.org/section/indepth
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4452
http://www.cdi.org/program/index.cfm?programid=73
Arms Sales by Supplier Nations
Arms sales (agreements) ranked by Supplier, 1998-2005 (in constant 2005 million US Dollars and percentage of world sales).
Arms sales (agreements) ranked by Supplier, 1998-2005 (in constant 2005 million US Dollars and percentage of world sales).
