Eurostep
115 Rue Stévin, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
Tel.: (32)-2-2311659 / Fax: (32)-2-2303780
E-mail: [email protected]
Eurostep Home Page
Arms Export Controls
A Position Paper
Introduction
The prolific and largely unregulated transfers of arms, particularly small
arms and light weapons, has resulted in tremendous human suffering. Together
with other factors, it has led to the persistent violation of the Geneva
Conventions and the erosion of civilians rights to protection from violence
and access to humanitarian assistance. In short, the lessons from history
tell us that introducing arms into countries with economic difficulties,
political or social tensions is virtually always bound to have negative
results. Arms continue to fuel the war in the Great Lakes region of central
Africa; arms prevent reconciliation in Colombia and Angola; and they undermine
the prospects for sustainable development, investment and reconstruction
in countries such as Albania.
The EU is currently responsible for 30-40% of the trade in conventional
weapons to the developing world. Moreover, many EU companies and individuals,
either directly or through brokering and licensed production agreements,
have supplied arms to many of the worlds most unstable countries. It is,
therefore, particularly fitting that the EU should show leadership on this
issue, and it is hoped that positive action taken by EU members will translated
into a greater international momentum to curb this deadly trade.
We should also not forget the impact of the Ottawa treaty to ban anti-personnel
landmines in creating a more conducive political climate towards tighter
controls over internationally transferred weapons. The negotiating process
for the treaty was unique in terms of its “inclusive and constructive
engagement” amongst international policy shaping community and governments
representing both 'northern' and 'southern' perspectives. It is Eurostep's
belief that such a process must be emulated, if tighter controls on arms
sales and supplies are to be achieved..
It is clear to us that the transfer of arms, particularly small arms
and light weapons, is a global process, involving a complex web of arms
traders, governments, individuals, shipping agents and brokers and/or criminal
networks. Moreover, the distinctions between legal transfers and illicit
transfers of these weapons are often hard to distinguish. Arms are more
likely being traded on a “grey” international market, than a purely “black”
one.
Eurostep believes that there should be a focus on three, interrelated
aspects of the arms trade, aimed at restricting both the supply
for arms and the demand for arms:
-
the development and implementation of restrictive international
Codes of Conduct to regulate legal transfers and close loopholes in export
control systems that facilitate “grey” market trafficking. In our
view, a restrictive EU Code of Conduct is the first step towards this process;
-
specific measures aimed at restricting the supply of, and demand for small
arms from the EU and elsewhere, including the destruction of surplus weapons
stocks;
-
to encourage swift ratification of the Ottawa treaty to ban the production,
trade, use and stockpiling of anti-personnel landmines coupled with greater
assistance for mine clearance, victim support and economic and social re-integration
programmes in de-mined areas.
1) The EU Code of Conduct:
Following the 1990 Gulf war and amid widespread concerns that the 'West'
helped arm the Iraqi war machine, the EU introduced 8 criteria governing
arms exports . Unfortunately, these criteria are non-binding (voluntary)
poorly defined and implemented very differently within EU member states.
As a result, they have had virtually no impact on arms exports policies
from within the EU.
A Code of Conduct was drawn up by members of the NGO community to address
these concerns.
Over 600 NGO's support this initiative: Parallel initiatives
are underway in the US and at the UN. The EU Code is a building
block to this process of developing meaningful international controls.
The UN level efforts are largely being led by Oscar Arias and other leading
Southern Nobel Peace Laureates.
In a welcome move, the UK and France have tabled a proposal for an EU-Wide
Code of Conduct, that aims to set “high common standards”, due to be adopted
by the end of the current UK presidency of the EU. However, Eurostep
members should be aware that there is a worrying shortfall
between the Code as proposed by the UK and France and the truly restrictive
Code of Conduct that NGO's and policy shapers have been advocating.
Essential requirements for a restrictive “Code of Conduct”
The following seven elements need to be included in the EU' Code of
Conduct:
1) Explicit and unequivocal criteria that prevent the
sale of arms:
-
to recipients who have committed gross and systematic violations of internationally
recognised human rights or where they might be used for such
purposes;
-
which increase the likelihood of armed conflict or threaten the security
of a region;
-
which undermine development
2) Clear consultation and implementation procedures, that establish:
-
EU-wide notification procedures of licence approvals and denials;
-
“no- undercutting” rules to prevent one EU member capturing contracts that
another has refused, based upon the principle of in depth multilateral
consultations;
-
lists of sensitive destinations to which exports will be embargoed or restricted.
3) A common and rigorous end-use controls to prevent re-export to third
countries.
4) A comprehensive control lists to cover all arms, police and paramilitary
equipment, training, services and dual-use technologies - where these are
intended for military or police end-users.
5) A rigorous system of parliamentary scrutiny and public transparency,
including:
-
pre-notification of all arms sales and publication of detailed annual reports
which are open to public access. This should lead to the formulation of
a comprehensive EU Register of arms exports to be submitted to, and debated
by the European Parliament.
6) Restrictions on brokering and licensed production.
7) An annual review process to examine the effectiveness of the Code
and to make recommendations for its continued development.
Eurostep urges the Council of the European Union and governments
of the Member States to:
-
establish a restrictive EU Code of Conduct to regulate arms
transfers incorporating the seven elements identified above.
2) Background on illicit Transfers and surplus stocks
There have been several recent international initiatives to tackle the
illicit trafficking of conventional weapons. In this respect, the
international community is increasingly recognising the destabilising effect
that these transfers have on societies. At the EU level, the Netherlands
established an EU programme to prevent and combat illicit trafficking during
their presidency in June 1997. Such progress has been reciprocated in other
international fora, including the Organisation of American States (OAS)
agreement on illicit production and trafficking in firearms, ammunition
and explosives and recent work at the UN, such as studies on small arms
control and firearms regulation. It is also widely expected that the G8
summit will focus on the illicit arms trade and its links with organised
crime, with an aim to agree an international instrument (largely based
on the OAS agreement) to prevent cross-boarder smuggling.
Since the end of the Cold war, many European governments have been left
with huge surplus stocks of weapons, including substantial numbers
of small arms and light weapons. The danger is that these are either being
offered for export at reduced prices or are increasing the likelihood of
arms trafficking from European countries. There is also a danger that there
may not be adequate transparency over the export of surplus stocks some
disposal agencies do not require export licenses.
Eurostep urges the Council of the European Union and governments
of Member States to:
-
effectively implement the EU initiative and recommendations from UN bodies,
including:
-
effective policing and international co-operation over the illicit arms
trade;
-
the construction of centralised international data-bases;
-
implementing disarmament programmes such as gun destruction and buy-back
schemes;
-
the destruction of surplus weapons stocks;
-
weapons tagging systems;
-
tighter controls over the manufacture and supply of ammunition and the
promotion of these measures in other international, regional and sub-regional
fora;
-
ensure that the EU adopts the additional recommendations from the OAS as
they relate to setting common legislation and control mechanisms over the
import and export of firearms, ammunition, explosives and other related
materials;
-
destroy surplus small weapons stocks instead of selling them for cheaply
prices to third world countries;
-
provide support which assists capacity building in developing countries
to prevent illegal arms transfers, as well as programmes of disarmament,
awareness raising and re-integration of combatants (as stipulated within
the EU programme) in arms effected countries such as Albania;
3) Anti-personnel Landmines
An unprecedented treaty to ban the production and export and use of landmines
was signed in Ottawa in December 1997. This Treaty was the culmination
of what has been called the Ottawa “fast track” process. This process was
started after many countries became frustrated with lack of progress in
negotiating a ban through UN disarmament bodies such as the UN Conference
on Disarmament. Over 120 countries, including most EU member states, Angola,
Bosnia Herzegovina, Cambodia, El Salvador and Mozambique signed this treaty
December last year in Ottawa. The treaty is unique as it has almost universal
support from both the international policy shaping community and negotiating
governments representing 'northern' and 'southern' perspectives.
Eurostep urges the governments of Member States to:
-
encourage Finland to also sign the Ottawa treaty;
-
proceed with a swift ratification and implementation of the Ottawa treaty
by and to use their influence (individually and as part of the EU) to convince
other countries and regional bodies to do likewise;
-
generate greater resources and capacity to promote mine clearance, victim
support and economic and social re-generation of de-mined areas and the
development of co-ordinated inter-agency and international implementation
of these measures
March 1998
Eurostep has produced this paper as a contribution
to the debates that are now taking place on establishing effective controls
on the export of arms from the European Union. The perspectives set out
in the paper are drawn from the experiences gain in development of Eurostep’s
member organisations through their involvement in development programmes
in Africa, Asia and Latin America. This paper was drafted by Oxfam-GB and
Novib drawing on collaborative work with Saferworld and other organisations
actively working for a restrictive European Code of Conduct on Arms transfers.
Eurostep co-ordinates the activities of like-minded
European NGDOs committed to people oriented development. The member organisations
of Eurostep are:
Action Aid, UK; CNCD, Belgium; CONCERN Worldwide,
Ireland; Deutsche Welthungerhilfe, Germany; Forum Syd, Sweden;
Frères des hommes, France; Helinas, Greece; Hivos, Netherlands;
Ibis, Denmark; Intermon, Spain; Kepa, Finland; Mani Tese,
Italy; Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke, Denmark; Movimondo, Italy;
NCOS, Belgium; Norwegian People’s Aid, Norway; Novib, Netherlands;
Oikos, Portugal; Oxfam, United Kingdom and Ireland; Swiss Coalition
of Development Organisations, Switzerland; terre des hommes, Germany. |
Updated on 16 April, 1998
Please address comments to Eurostep
(Yvette Pierret)
Developer's Note: These pages were developed for use on the Netscape browser.