The Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) is working to end the arms trade and to promote peace, justice and democratic values. The arms business has a deplorable impact on human rights and security, as well as on global, regional, and local economic development. Large scale military procurement and arms exports only reinforce a militaristic approach to international problems.
CAAT considers that no arms should be procured or exported where they might:
- exacerbate conflict or increase tension;
- support an oppressive regime or undermine democracy;
- threaten social welfare through the level of military spending;
- and that there should be progressive demilitarisation within arms producing countries.
For this to happen, the relationship between government and arms companies needs to become subject to the democratic process, rather than being above it. Governments preferential treatment of the arm industry, including subsidies for arms exports, needs to end. Security needs to be seen in much broader terms that are not dominated by military and arms company interest. A wider security policy would have the opportunity to reprioritise resources according to actual threats and benefits, not least giving income inequality and carbon emissions the central positions they should occupy.
It is against this background that CAAT comments, section by section, on the programme announced by the Conservative - Liberal Democrat Coalition government on 20 May 2010.
Business Section
The section does not mention either UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) or the Export Credits Guarantee Department (ECGD) although the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has responsibility for both, the former shared with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. See International Development, below.
Defence section
This says: "We will support defence jobs through exports that are used for legitimate purposes, not internal repression, and will work for a full international ban on cluster munitions."
* There is no definition of "legitimate purposes". Is there to be any change from previous practice where military equipment exported from the UK was used by Israel in Lebanon and Gaza; where the sale of fighter jets to Saudi Arabia took precedence over the possibility of effective UK government protests over human rights concerns and a criminal investigation for bribery; and where an expensive and useless military radar system was successfully promoted to Tanzania?
* A Government concerned about boosting employment should not look at military export jobs to do this. Arms export jobs are heavily subsidised by the taxpayer, a subsidy that could be directed to more productive alternatives, one being renewable energy technologies. Investment here would have a security benefit that is in stark contrast to the instability and conflict promoted by the arms trade and could establish a UK presence in a vibrant, growing sector.
Furthermore, it is a myth that vast numbers of jobs are currently supported by arms exports. In fact, these account for 0.2% of the UK workforce and less than 2% of manufacturing employment. The buying countries also increasingly want to have part of the production progress. The sale of Eurofighters to Saudi Arabia illustrates this. Two thirds of the 72 Eurofighters sold to Saudi Arabia are to be assembled there. Similarly, 66 Hawk jets were sold to India, but 42 are being manufactured under licence in India by HAL.
* There are already criteria that say that exports will not be permitted if they might be used for internal repression. That has not stopped UK military exports going to countries such as China, Israel, Sri Lanka and Thailand where it is impossible to be sure that they will not contribute to internal repression.
* The UK has already ratified the Convention on Cluster Munitions which enters into force on 1st August 2010. Presumably, the Coalition's policy is a commitment to persuading countries, such as Russia and the United States, which have yet to join the Convention to do so.
* Unless it is seen to be part of "We will aim to reduce Ministry of Defence running costs by at least 25%", there is no mention of the big white elephant projects such as Eurofighter and the aircraft carrier programmes.
Foreign Affairs section
There is no mention of conventional arms transfer policy nor the regulation of "Corporate Mercenaries", more politely known as private military and security companies. This is perhaps not altogether surprising, given the breadth of the Foreign Office's responsibilities. The Labour government was developing proposals for self-regulation of Corporate Mercenaries, however, there were major reservations about this not only from CAAT and other campaigning organisations but also from the industry itself.
International development
Strangely, because the Department for International Development has not led on any of these issues to date, the programme says: "We will support efforts to establish an International Arms Trade Treaty to limit the sales of arms to dangerous regimes."
The programme does not define what constitutes a "dangerous regime". However, the arms companies support the Arms Trade Treaty as they do not believe that it would "bring new obligations for UK industry" and clearly do not feel that their sales would be constrained. There is a very real risk that the Arms Trade Treaty as currently envisaged would further legitimate the arms trade without reducing sales, even to governments, such as those of Israel or Saudi Arabia, that many would consider dangerous.
The programme further says:
"We will ensure that UK Trade and Investment and ECGD become champions for British companies that develop and export innovative green technologies around the world, instead of of supporting investment in dirty fossil fuel energy production."
This sounds excellent, but makes no mention of any break from the the current and recent realities.
- UKTI, through its Defence & Security Organisation, gives support to arms industry that is entirely disproportionate. UKTI devotes 180 staff to promoting arms sales, whereas the specific support provided to all non-arms sectors amounts to 142 staff - despite arms being only 1.5% of total UK exports and, even then, 40% of their components are imported.
- In 2007/8 57% of all export credit support was for military deals; in 2008/9 (after BAE Systems withdraw from cover for its Saudi deals) 73% of support went to Airbus. Between them, military and aerospace exports have dominated the ECGD's business over the last decade.
National Security section
It is interesting that the programme separates Defence from National Security, which focuses on terrorism. However, it is in this section that it says: "We have commenced a Strategic Defence and Security Review, commissioned and overseen by the National Security Council, with strong Treasury involvement. We will also develop and publish a new National Security Strategy."
There is no mention in this section of climate change and other major challenges to our security.
Email this page to a friend
RSS feed
Give us feedback on this page