Appendix 6: Memorandum from the Campaign
Against Arms Trade
1. The Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT)
is working for the reduction and ultimate abolition of the international
arms trade, together with progressive demilitarisation within
arms-producing countries. Recognising that its aims will not be
achieved overnight, CAAT often focuses on those aspects of the
trade which are most immediately destructive.
2. CAAT hoped that the new Export Control
Act, and in particular the detailed secondary legislation under
it, would address some of the greatest concerns about the trade
in military equipment. At each stage in the process towards the
Act and its implementation these hopes have been dashed; finally,
by the Government's response to your Committees' report.
3. CAAT welcomes the opportunity to comment
on its chief concerns regarding the expected secondary legislation.
TRAFFICKING AND
BROKERING
4. In 2001 it had appeared that the Labour
government recognised that arms brokers carried on their work
irrespective of national boundaries and had promised to control
their activities wherever they were located. Now, to the immense
disappointment of many and with potentially appalling consequences
for those living in the world's trouble spots, the Government
has reneged on this promise.
5. As so often seems to be the case, the
Government's good intentions to restrict and control the arms
trade come to nought when military companies lobby to be allowed
to continue their activities without additional regulation. CAAT
notes that in this case the Government has explicitly said, when
rejecting your Committees' recommendation to apply controls to
all trafficking and brokering, that it "would be likely to
criminalise legitimate business by UK defence companies overseas
carried out according to the laws of the appropriate country."
6. The Government says that it "remains
convinced that the most effective way of preventing the illicit
trade in small arms is through multi-lateral action". However,
tough unilateral controls on the export of any kind of military
equipment (not necessarily small arms) does not preclude multi-lateral
action. Rather it, and especially when taken by one of the world's
major exporters, begins to build a new and more restrictive consensus
for restrictive export controls.
ARMS EXHIBITION
7. CAAT is pleased that the Government has
recognised that the activities taking place at trade fairs (seemingly
the new euphemism for arms exhibitions) are not "in themselves
special" and that Trade Control Licences will be issued.
It is to be hoped, however, that any special administrative procedures
put in place to deal with the expected surge in demand at the
time of such exhibitions will not result in a licensing process
that is in any way more permissive than usual.
CONCLUSIONS
8. The whole process over the reform of
the strategic export control legislation has been educative. Hopes
after the arms-to-Iraq scandal that the UK government (of whatever
complexion) might really address the issue have been dealt blow
after blow. Huge amounts of work by civil servants, parliamentarians
(particularly your Committee) and non-governmental organisations
have resulted in a system that is largely unchanged.
9. There have been some advances. The system
is more transparent than before, some brokerage issues have been
addressed and the trade in "intangibles" has been brought
within the system. There are even written export criteria, though
actual exports licensed since they were announced, time and again
appear to render them meaningless. Fundamentally, the scale, destinations
and type of military equipment exported has not changed.
10. It would appear that all the attempts
at a strict export regime will fail whilst the Government has
two conflicting roles—of controlling military exports and
of promoting them. The belief in the need for a strong military
industry—despite growing evidence that it is good neither
for the UK economy nor for UK employment—undermines the
attempts to control exports. The close relationship between military
industry and the Government needs to be seriously questioned if
the misery and suffering caused by the arms trade is to be ended.
November 2003
| 
