8 Arms export control policies
Arms exports and human rights
175. In their 2011 report (HC686) the Committees
stated:
We recommend that the Government in its response
to this report sets out how it intends to reconcile the potential
conflict of interest between increased emphasis on promoting arms
exports with the staunch upholding of human rights.[238]
In its Response (Cm 8079) the Government replied:
"The Government believes that its security, prosperity and
values agendas are mutually reinforcing." The Government
went on to say: "Respect for human rights and fundamental
freedoms are mandatory considerations for all export licence applications."[239]
176. The
Committees conclude that, whilst the promotion of arms exports
and the upholding of human rights are both legitimate Government
policies, the Government would do well to acknowledge that there
is an inherent conflict between strongly promoting arms exports
to authoritarian regimes whilst strongly criticising their lack
of human rights at the same time. The Committees further conclude
that whilst the Government's statement that "respect for
human rights and fundamental freedoms are mandatory considerations
for all export licence applications" is welcome, those considerations
do not appear to have weighed sufficiently heavily on either the
present Government or on its predecessor given the unprecedented
scale of arms export licence revocations that the Government has
made since the "Arab Spring" the stated reason
for revocation being in every single case "that this licence
now contravenes Criteria 2 and 3".[240]
Criteria 2 is headed "The respect of human rights and fundamental
freedoms in the country of final destination", and Criteria
3 is headed "The internal situation in the country of final
destination, as a function of the existence of tensions, or armed
conflicts."
Overseas Security and Justice
Assistance (OSJA) Human Rights Guidance
177. Giving overseas Governments assistance with
improving their security and administration of justice may involve
the UK Government supporting the commercial export or gifting
of goods subject to export licensing. Table 2.4 of the Government's
Strategic Export Controls Annual Report 2010 details equipment
gifted by the Government in 2010.[241]
178. On 15 December 2011 the Foreign Secretary in
a Written Ministerial Statement announced the publication of the
Government's Overseas Security and Justice Assistance (OSJA) Human
Rights Guidance.[242]
179. The UK Working Group submitted additional written
evidence to the Committees giving its views on the OSJA Human
Rights Guidance. The UKWG said that the UK Consolidated Criteria
should remain the sole basis on which decisions are made regarding
arms transfers. It stated that in some cases security and defence
equipment is sold or gifted as part of a package including other
types of assistance, such as the provision of training in crowd
control methods. Such training should, in the UKWG's view, "in
no way be seen as overriding the need to robustly implement the
Consolidated Criteria." It pointed out that the OSJA guidance
makes it clear that it currently applies only to the FCO, but
that following a review in April 2012 will be applied to all Government
Departments. The UKWG stated that currently the majority of UK
overseas security and justice assistance is provided by DFID,
MoD and the Stabilisation Unit, with only a minority of support
provided by the FCO and was concerned that there did not appear
to have been cross-departmental guidance on the delivery of security
and justice assistance until now. Saferworld (part of UKWG) said
that it looked forward to the cross-departmental guidance and
hoped that the review in April would be conducted in consultation
with external actors.[243]
UKWG recommended that:
- The human rights guidance should be incorporated
into a single operational toolkit which addresses the practical
challenges of putting these many commitments into practice;
- The review of the OSJA, in April 2012, should
make explicit what is meant by "overseas security and justice",
setting out the full range of interventions to which the guidance
applies. Security and justice assistance should be conceived more
broadly than just "train and equip-type" programmes.
- The UK Consolidated Criteria should remain the
sole basis on which decisions about arms transfers licensing is
made, regardless of whether other types of security and justice
assistance are delivered alongside.[244]
180. When the Foreign Secretary gave Oral evidence
to the Committees on 7 February 2012, he was asked what impact
he thought the OSJA Human Rights Guidance would have when considering
applications for arms licences. The Foreign Secretary replied:
This is about providing security and justice assistance,
which can be related to arms for the reasons we were discussing
earlier. I was describing how, in the case of Libya, there were
licences that related to a training programme. So the linkage
here is that the specific reference to the consolidated criteria
is contained in checklist A, as it is called, of the guidance,
which requires staff to consult the consolidated criteria where
the provision of equipment is part of the assistance. So although
it is intended that information sought under this guidance can
be used to help make decisions relevant to arms exports, the specific
test set out in the consolidated criteria must apply when there
is a question of exporting arms.[245]
The Chairman of the Committees then put the following
proposal to the Foreign Secretary:
"[...]buried away in a microscopic footnote
on page 14 of the guidance it does indeed say to officials conducting
their checklist that it "is not intended to cover the export
of military or security equipment. If the provision of equipment
is part of your assistance, you must consult the Consolidated
Arms Export Licensing Criteria." I put it to you, Foreign
Secretary, particularly as you have said specifically in front
of the Committees that assistance is provided through the making
available of equipment, which could include items within the arms
export control area, that you should reconsider whether this crucial
sentence should be promoted from being dismally put in microscopic
print in a footnote to having very strong prominence in your human
rights guidance.[246]
The Foreign Secretary replied: "That may be
a very good suggestion. We will have a look at that."[247]
181. The
Committees recommend that the OSJA Human Rights Guidance is amended
to make it prominently and unequivocally clear that if military
or security equipment is being exported in an Overseas Security
and Justice Assistance programme, the decision as to whether or
not to approve such exports must be made solely and wholly in
accordance with the Consolidated Arms Export Licensing Criteria
and procedures. The Committees further recommend that the requirement
on officials in the current guidance merely to consult the Consolidated
Arms Export Licensing Criteria in such export cases should be
replaced by a requirement to adhere strictly to the Licensing
Criteria and procedures.
Surveillance technology and equipment
182. It has been reported that surveillance technology
and equipment is being exported from the UK to repressive regimes
who may use it against human rights activists. The report also
referred to a letter from 10 Downing Street to Privacy International
saying that the Government was actively looking at this issue
and was working within the EU to introduce new controls on surveillance.[248]
183. The Committees
recommend that the Government sets out in its Response to this
Report:
a) what changes it will make to
UK export control legislation and procedures to prevent surveillance
technology and equipment being exported from the UK to repressive
regimes who may use this technology and equipment to suppress
human rights; and
b) what action the Government is
taking to prevent such exports from EU Member States generally.
Export of Tasers
184. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at
the FCO, Alistair Burt, wrote to the Committees' Chairman on 8
February 2012 notifying him that the Minister would be making
a Written Ministerial Statement the following day announcing a
limited lifting of the ban on the export of Tasers (electric shock
discharge guns) from the UK.[249]
In his Written Statement on 9 February, the Minister said that
the Government would now consider applications for the grant of
a licence for the export of Tasers, but only under the following
limited circumstance:
(i) Where the export of tasers is to the police service
of a Crown dependency or UK overseas territory and where it has
been specifically recommended by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of
Constabulary that such a police service adopts the use of such
equipment by trained officers as an alternative to the use of
lethal firearms, and that the use of the equipment is in line
with the accepted standards set for UK police officers; or
(ii) Where tasers constitute officially issued equipment
for use by suitably trained UK police officers who are being deployed
in support of a police operation in a Crown Dependency or overseas
territory, and where that deployment has been requested by the
chief police officer of the Crown Dependency or overseas territory;
or
(iii) Where the equipment belonging to a UK police
force, the police service of a Crown Dependency or UK overseas
territory, or to an authorised agent working on their behalf,
is being returned to the original manufacturer for repair, or
replacement of faulty equipment, or as unwanted goods.[250]
185. The Committees
recommend that the Government informs them promptly of any breaches
of the conditions under which Tasers may be exported under limited
circumstances from the UK as set out in the Written Ministerial
Statement made by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. Alistair Burt, on 9 February
2012.
Arms exports and internal repression
186. A central concern of the Committees has been
whether or not there has been a change of policy on arms exports
and internal repression by the present Government from that adopted
by the previous Government. The question as to whether or not
there had been a change of policy assumed key importance when
the present Government, following repressive violence against
civilian demonstrators in the "Arab Spring", revoked
an unprecedented number of 158 extant UK arms export licences,
stating that in every single case the licence now contravened
Criterion 2, which reads that "the Government will not issues
an export licence if there is a clear risk that the proposed export
might be used for internal repression."
187. The previous Government's complete policy on
arms exports was set out by the then Minister of State in the
FCO, Peter Hain, in a Written Answer given on 26 October 2000.[251]
This Answer is reproduced in full in Annex 3 to this Report. In
his summary of the then Government's policy in his Written Answer,
Peter Hain said: "An export licence will not be issued if
the arguments for doing so are outweighed by [...]concern that
the goods might be used for internal repression [...]". Later
in his Written Answer Peter Hain, when setting out Criterion Two,
headed "The respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms
in the country of final destination", also said that "the
Government will: a. Not issue an export licence if there is a
clear risk that the proposed export might be used for internal
repression".
188. The two policy tests to be applied as set out
in Peter Hain's 26 October 2000 Written Answer were faithfully
and accurately reproduced by the present Government's FCO Minister
Alistair Burt in his Press Statement of 18 February 2011 in which
he said: "The longstanding British position is clear: We
will not issue licences where we judge there is a clear risk that
the proposed export might provoke or prolong regional or internal
conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal repression."[252]
189. The policy importance of the two separate tests
was highlighted by the Chairman of the Committees, Sir John Stanley,
in the Westminster Hall debate on the Committees' last Report,
when he said, referring to the 18 February 2011 statement of the
FCO Minister Alistair Burt:
That is absolutely correct wording and punctuation,
from which hon. Members will see that there are in fact two separate
tests. There is the "clear risk" test as to whether
the proposed export could aggravate conflict. If we had just the
"clear risk" test, we could probably end up justifying
the sale of pretty well anything to any country. We could say,
"Well, there's a bit of a risk, but it's not a clear risk,
so we can sell." We would probably draw the line at Chairman
Kim Jong Il in North Korea, President Mugabe and the Burmese military
junta, but for everyone else, we could say, "Well, the risk
isn't clear. Let's get on and sell."
That is why the second partthe remainderof
the Minister's statement is critical:
"or which might be used to facilitate internal
repression."
I say very firmly to this Minister and to the House
that the Committees on Arms Export Controls attach the utmost
importance to that wording and to its retention by the British
Government, so that we can be assured that British weapons and
equipment will not be used for internal repression.[253]
190. However, it did not become unequivocally clear
that the present Government's policy on arms exports and internal
repression remained unchanged from that of the previous Government
until the Foreign Secretary gave Oral evidence to the Committees
on 7 February 2012. The key exchange was as follows:
Chair:
Secretary of State, I want to start with what is a major policy
issue, if not the major policy issue for our Committees, which
is whether there has been a change in Government policy on the
approval of arms export licences for arms and ammunition and military
equipment that could be used for internal repression. We took
a deliberate decision in our report of last April to publish in
full, as Annex 1, the Written Answer that was given by the then
Minister of State in the Foreign Office, Peter Hain, on 26 October
2000 in which he set out in full the consolidated criteria for
arms exports.
As far as arms exports that involve weapons
that could be used for internal repression are concerned, your
junior Minister, Alistair Burt, in his press release statement
on 18 February last year, entirely accurately and correctly summarised
the previous Government's position carried forward by the present
Government on policy in this area. He summarised that accurately
in these words: "The longstanding British position is clear.
We will not issue licences where we judge there is a clear risk
the proposed export might provoke or prolong regional or internal
conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal repression."
Foreign Secretary, has that policy changed, or is it as correctly
stated by Mr Alistair Burt?
Mr Hague: That
is still the policy. The "or", as you have pointed out
on other occasions, is important.
Chair: It is profoundly
important, Foreign Secretary, and I am glad that you have acknowledged
that.[254]
191. The
Committees conclude that the Foreign Secretary's statement to
the Committees that there has been no change of policy on arms
exports and internal repression by the present Government from
that stated by the previous Government is welcome, the present
Government's policy being: "The longstanding British position
is clear: We will not issue licences where we judge there is a
clear risk that the proposed export might provoke or prolong regional
or internal conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal
repression." The Committees recommend that the Government
adheres strictly to its stated policy on arms exports and internal
repression for all export licence applications.
The Government's Arab Spring
arms export policy review
192. Shortly after the Arab Spring commenced, in
Tunisia in December 2010, the Government announced it was conducting
a review of arms exports from the UK. The first announcement
of the review was made by the FCO Minister, Alistair Burt, in
a Press Statement made on 18 February 2011, the full text of which
was as follows:
Commenting on a review of arms export in light of
recent events, Minister for the Middle East and North Africa Alistair
Burt today said:
"We are deeply concerned about the situation
in Bahrain and the events which have led to the deaths of several
protestors.
Under the legislative regime set up in 2000, exports
to Bahrain were governed by the Consolidated EU and National Arms
Export Licensing Criteria, which are administered by the Department
for BIS. There has been no change to the Criteria since the general
election.
As a result of the changing situation in Bahrain,
we have conducted an immediate and rapid review of UK export licences.
With advice from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Department
of Business, Innovation and Skills, the licensing authority has
taken a decision to revoke 24 individual licences and 20 open
licences for Bahrain.
A separate decision has also been taken to revoke
eight individual licences for Libya. The review of export licences
to the wider region, including Yemen, is ongoing.
This Government takes extremely seriously its export
control responsibilities. Britain has some of the most rigorous
export controls in the World. All export licence applications
are considered on a case-by-case basis against the Consolidated
EU and UK export licensing criteria and in the light of prevailing
circumstances, paying particular attention to allegations of human
rights abuses.
The longstanding British position is clear: We will
not issue licences where we judge there is a clear risk that the
proposed export might provoke or prolong regional or internal
conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal repression.
We have no evidence of British equipment being used
in the unrest in Bahrain." [255]
193. The Committees on Arms Export Controls compiled
a table, from the information on the BIS Department's and the
FCO's websites, detailing selected arms export licences approved
since January 2009 to countries in the Middle East and North Africa
of arms or components of arms that could be used for internal
repression. The countries in the table to whom such arms export
licences had been approved were Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq,
Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria,
Tunisia, United Arab Emirates and Yemen. The table was published
on 5 April 2011 as Annex 4 to the Committees' First Report in
the present Parliament (HC686).[256]
194. In their 5 April 2011 Report, the Committees
made the following conclusions and recommendations in relation
to the Government's arms export review:
We conclude that both the present Government and
its predecessor misjudged the risk that arms approved for export
to certain authoritarian countries in the Middle East and North
Africa might be used for internal repression. We further conclude
that the Government's decision to revoke a considerable number
of arms export licences to Bahrain, Egypt, Libya and Tunisia is
very welcome.
We recommend that, in its response to this Report:
- The Government states what specific and systematic
consideration of arms exports is carried out within the National
Security Strategy and at meetings of the National Security Council;
- The Government states the outcome of its review
of arms exports to the wider Middle East region as announced by
the FCO Minister, Mr Alistair Burt, on 18 February;
- The Government states what changes it will make
to improve both its arms export control procedures and its judgements
about the risk of arms exported from the UK being used for internal
repression by authoritarian regimes.[257]
195. The Government's Response to the conclusions
and recommendations in Cm 8079 published in July 2011 was as follows:
Countering the proliferation of conventional weapons
is a major driver of conflict and instability and is an element
of security support within the National Security Strategy. We
are committed to effective implementation of export controls at
national level, and will also assist other states to develop and
implement the governance mechanisms needed to ensure tough controls
on arms transfers, and we will continue to play a leading role
in pressing internationally for a legally binding Arms Trade Treaty.
There have been to date no specific or systematic consideration
of arms exports at meetings of the National Security Council.
[...]
The Foreign Secretary has commissioned a review of
Government policy and practice with regard to the export of equipment
that might be used for internal repression, in particular crowd
control goods. Although this review was originally commissioned
in response to events in the Middle East and North Africa, any
conclusions will apply to our procedures for arms exports to all
countries. The FCO is leading this internal review in close collaboration
with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)
and the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The Government will be reporting
back on the review to Parliament. This will take place once the
Foreign Secretary has fully considered the findings of the review.[258]
196. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 18
July 2011,[259] the
Chairman of the Committees put a further 4 questions to the Government
on its arms exports review which the Foreign Secretary answered
with his letter to the Chairman of 30 September 2011.[260]
The 4 questions and answers were as follows:
Committees' question:
Why is the FCO not in close consultation with DFID as well as
with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the
Ministry of Defence on its arms exports review?
Government's answer: The
FCO works closely with DFID on arms export controls. DFID was
fully consulted on the FCO Review of Export Controls Policy.
Committees' question: By
what date does the Government expect to have reported back to
Parliament on its arms exports review?
Government's answer: The
Foreign Secretary provided an update on the review to Parliament
on 18 July through a Written Ministerial Statement. He said that
the review concluded that further work is needed on how we operate
certain aspects of our export controls. The Foreign Secretary
and the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills
(who has responsibility for our export licensing operations) are
considering how this should be done. Once the process is complete
the Foreign Secretary will update the House on proposals, but
we are unable to confirm exactly when this might happen at present.
Committees' question:
The Government has now chosen to give a particular focus in its
arms exports review to "crowd control goods". What arms
and categories of arms does the Government consider to be "crowd
control goods"?
Government's answer: There
is no comprehensive list of "crowd control goods" but
some equipment carries a risk a being used for internal repression
(rather than legitimate public order needs or external defence);
this includes:
- CS grenades, tear gas canisters,
crowd control ammunition
- Water cannons
- Anti-riot shields
- Body armour
- Shotguns, small arms, semi-automatic pistols,
assault rifles, sniper rifles, submachine guns, and ammunition
- Armoured personnel carriers, armoured fighting
vehicles
Committees' question: Why
has the Government apparently restricted the scope of its review
by giving it a particular focus on "crowd control goods"
when no such restriction was made when the FCO Minister Alistair
Burt first announced the review on February 18?
Government's answer: The
announcement of the review and its focus was made during the Foreign
Secretary's appearance before the FAC on 16 March 2011. The focus
on "crowd control goods" was a result of incidents
during the Arab Spring, as well as the issues raised by the Foreign
Affairs Committee about equipment being sold to Gulf states for
external defence, and concerns about those states that use that
equipment against their domestic populations. For example, Mr
Baron MP sought a Government commitment to say: "When it
comes to specific arms that can be used against a domestic population,
the Government will promise to undertake a full review to ensure
that we don't make the mistakes of the past"? Mr Hague confirmed
that "We will have a review. There is no doubt about that.
The area to concentrate on is the one you are talking about. I
will go that far to meet your request".[261]
197. The
Committees conclude that the Government's repeated use of the
phrase "crowd control goods" in the context of its arms
export review is misleading given that "crowd control goods"
are generally associated with non-lethal equipment. The Committees
further conclude that the Government's use of the phrase "crowd
control goods" to include "shotguns, small arms, semi-automatic
pistols, assault rifles, sniper rifles, submachine guns, and ammunition,
armoured personnel carriers, armoured fighting vehicles"
is not one that would be acceptable to Parliament or to the wider
public. The Committees recommend that the Government discontinues
the use of the phrase "crowd control goods" in this
context, which as well as being misleading is also profoundly
disrespectful to the thousands of unarmed civilians in the Arab
Spring countries who have courageously demonstrated for human
rights and fundamental freedoms and have put their lives at risk
in doing so.
198. The Foreign Secretary made a Written Ministerial
Statement on 18 July 2011 following, what he said at the time,
was the completion of the Government's arms export review. The
complete Statement was as follows:
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth
Affairs (Mr William Hague):
I told the Foreign Affairs Select Committee on 16 March 2011 that
the Government would commission a thorough review of the UK's
policy and practice with regard to the export of equipment that
might be used for internal repression, in particular crowd control
goods, in the light of events in the middle east and north Africa
and concerns in Parliament and the public about UK policy.
This review has now been completed. It was conducted
by Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials in close consultation
with their colleagues across Whitehall, and it examined our policy
on arms exports. Its purpose was to determine whether improvements
could be made to reduce further the risk of misuse of UK-origin
controlled military goods and to increase confidence that goods
exported from the United Kingdom would not be used for internal
repression. It looked specifically at events in the middle east
and north Africa region.
The review concluded that there was no evidence of
any misuse of controlled military goods exported from the United
Kingdom. There were some reports of the use of UK-origin crowd
control vehicles in Libya, but these reports remain uncorroborated.
Consultations with our overseas posts revealed no
evidence that any of the offensive naval, air or land-based military
platforms used by Governments in north Africa or the middle east
against their own populations during the Arab spring, were supplied
from the United Kingdom.
However, the review also concluded that further work
is needed on how we operate certain aspects of the controls. The
Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills has responsibility
for our export licensing operations. The Secretary of State and
I will consider how this should be done, and once that process
is complete I will update the House on our proposals.[262]
No reference was made in the Statement to the UK
Government's arms export licence approvals since 1 January 2009
for lethal and non-lethal equipment that could be used for internal
repression in countries in the Middle East and North Africa as
set out in Annex 4 of the Committees' Report (HC686).[263]
199. On 13 October 2011, the Foreign Secretary made
a further Written Ministerial Statement in which he said he was
announcing the outcome of the Government's arms exports review.
The full text of the Foreign Secretary's Statement was as follows:
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth
Affairs (Mr William Hague):
I am today announcing the outcome of a review of UK defence and
security export policy in the light of events in the middle east
and north Africa.
On 16 March 2011, I told the Foreign Affairs Committee
that the Government would review policy and practice with regard
to the export of equipment that might be used for internal repression,
in particular crowd control goods, in the light of events in the
middle east and north Africa. Government colleagues with responsibilities
in this area, in particular the Secretary of State for Business,
Innovations and Skills who has responsibility for our export licensing
systems and operations, have been consulted in the course of this
review.
The review concluded that there are no fundamental
flaws with the UK export licensing system. But the review identified
areas where our system could be further strengthened to enable
Ministers to respond rapidly and decisively to the outbreak of
conflict, instability or unpredictable events in other countries.
Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is already a
mandatory criterion for all export licence decisions. The changes
announced today will increase our confidence that UK-origin goods
will not be misused for internal repression, and that our controls
are being applied in an orderly and systematic way, informed and
influenced by our values and interests. This will complement the
Government's efforts to build Britain's prosperity by increasing
exports and helping UK companies succeed in international markets.
The Government propose to introduce a mechanism to
allow immediate licensing suspension to countries experiencing
a sharp deterioration in security or stability. Applications in
the pipeline would be stopped and no further licences issued,
pending ministerial or departmental review.
We also propose the introduction of a revised risk
categorisation, based on objective indicators and reviewed regularly,
that keeps pace with changing circumstances; enhances our assessment
against all export control criteria, including human rights violations;
and allows specifically for ministerial scrutiny of open licences
to ensure that the benefits of open licensing can be maintained
while keeping the associated risks to acceptable levels. This
will increase oversight by Ministers, including of individual
licence applications.
As a result of these changes the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office will ensure that export licensing policy is more responsive
to rapidly changing circumstances, particularly political instability;
bring more structure and consistency to the gathering of export-related
information, provide more information on the human rights situation
in country, including through following new security and justice
assistance guidance and undertake end-use monitoring of controlled
military goods, bearing in mind both the practical and resource
limitations.
The Government will continue to work to improve public
information on defence and security exports, including enhanced
transparency of routine export licensing decisions and how we
respond during a crisis. We welcome the scrutiny of the Committees
on Arms Export Controls and will continue to assist in their important
work.
The Government have also considered how we can strengthen
our decision making when we provide security and justice assistance
overseas. We must provide assistance to international partners
to tackle threats such as terrorism, serious organised crime and
conflict prevention. In doing so, we will ensure that this assistance
supports our values, is consistent with our domestic and international
human rights obligations, and seeks to promote human rights and
democracy. To this end, guidance will be issued for all HMG officials
on assessing the human rights implications of our overseas security
and justice assistance. We will make this guidance public later
this year.
We are committed to robust and effective national
and global controls to help prevent exports that could undermine
our own security or core values of human rights and democracy;
to protect our security through strategic defence relationships;
and to promote our prosperity by allowing British defence and
security industries to operate effectively in the global defence
market.
The Government are determined to learn the wider
lessons of events in the middle east and north Africa. I believe
that this package of improvements is the proper response to the
lessons of this year. This does not preclude additional measures
or further strengthening of the system.[264]
200. The main outcome of the review was the Government's
proposal to introduce a new mechanism to allow the immediate suspension
of arms export licences that had already been approved if "a
sharp deterioration in security or stability" took place
in a given country. However, little or no consideration appears
to have been given in the Government's review as to whether the
initial judgements to approve export licences to repressive regimes
in the Middle East and North Africa for arms and equipment that
might be used to facilitate internal repression were correct or
not in the first place. The Chairman of the Committees, Sir John
Stanley, highlighted this in the Westminster Hall debate on the
Committees' 2011 Report when he said:
The Foreign Secretary stated:
"The review concluded that there are no fundamental
flaws with the UK export licensing system."
It mayor may notbe true that there
are no flaws in the system, but I am not persuaded that the Government
are addressing the key point about flawed judgments within the
system. The inescapable fact is that judgments have been shown
to be wildly over-optimistic and rose-tinted regarding the sale
to authoritarian regimes of weapons that could be used for internal
repression.
The Foreign Secretary continued:
"The Government propose to introduce a mechanism
to allow immediate licensing suspension to countries experiencing
a sharp deterioration in security or stability,"
but that does not address the central problem, because
suspension becomes relevant only after export licensed goods have
moved out of the UK. Suspension means that a licence has already
been granted and that the goods have left the UK and are out of
the doorthe bullets have bolted and are in the hands of
an authoritarian regime. Although a better system of suspension
would provide a good safety net, it does not deal with the central
issue of making a correct initial judgment about whether to grant
an export licence.[265]
201. The limitations of a control policy relying
on the suspension or revocation of existing arms export licences
was acknowledged by the FCO Minister Alistair Burt in his Answer
to a Written Question from the Chairman of CAEC, Sir John Stanley,
when the Minister said: "While we can, under certain circumstances,
revoke export licences, we cannot recall equipment once exported
[...]"[266]
202. A further Ministerial Written Statement headed
"Strategic Export Licensing" was made by the Secretary
of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Vince Cable, on
7 February 2012. In his Statement Vince Cable provided more details
about the Government's new mechanism for suspending arms export
licences and about its proposals to improve the transparency of
the export licensing system, which are considered in paragraphs
85-91 above. The full text of the Secretary of State's Statement
is at paragraph 86 above.
203. When in the Oral evidence session on 7 February
2012 the Committees questioned the Foreign Secretary about the
outcome of the review he replied that there had been increased
ministerial oversight, with a substantial increase in the number
of applications overseen by Ministers in 2009 there had
been 24 applications overseen by Ministers and in 2011 there would
be 153. The Foreign Secretary added that there had been new requirements
for more end-use monitoring, export licensing, specific training
for desk officers, new security and justice guidance and "more
systematic use of many sources of information, including NGOs
and other organisation to assess" human rights situation
by Foreign Office posts.[267]
204. In his Written Ministerial Statement on 13 October
2011 the Foreign Secretary said that: "The Government will
continue to work to improve public information on defence and
security exports, including enhanced transparency of routine export
licensing decisions and how we respond during a crisis."[268]
However, the UK Working Group, commenting on the review process,
stated that the "review itself has been anything but transparent."
It said that despite a statement made by the Director for National
Security, Directorate for Defence and Strategic Threats in the
FCO, during evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee,
that NGOs were consulted during the course of the first stage
of the review, [269]
"there has been no consultation to date with external stakeholders
(be they from civil society, industry or parliament)."[270]
Civil servants gave an informal briefing to NGOs on progress
in the review after the first set of recommendations had been
sent to Ministers, "but despite numerous requests, at no
point were consultations held." [271]
When the Committees asked the UKWG about the consultation
Roy Isbister (Saferworld) told us that the NGOs' degree of involvement
had been "minimal."[272]
Martin Butcher (Oxfam) said that NGOs had been requesting consultation
meetings for some time and that their requests were not met.[273]
Later in the evidence session we asked EGAD about its involvement
in the consultation process: Barry Salzman (EGAD) told us that
it had no meetings with Government officials before the review
was concluded. He continued: "We are now trying to catch
up to set a date for a meeting where we can be briefed on the
outcome of the policy and its implementation."[274]
UKWG concluded that the process had been "deeply unsatisfactory"
and asked that a much wider and deeper review of the transfer
licensing policy and its implementation should take place.[275]
205. In his Oral evidence the Foreign Secretary said
that it had been an internal review. When he asked his officials
to expand Sarah MacIntosh, Director of Defence and International
Security, FCO, said: "There was some consultation. The Head
of the Counter-Proliferation Department met with NGOs on 14 November
last year, and with industry on 15 November."[276]
David Hall, Deputy Head, Counter-Proliferation Department, FCO,
added:
Prior to that, there were informal consultations,
giving information about how the review was going ahead. Prior
to that, Jill Morris, the Head of the CPD at the time, met a number
of NGOs. We meet a number of these NGOs on a regular basis on
export control issues all the time. We are aware of and interested
in their views on the system.[277]
206. The Chairman of the Committees wrote to the
Foreign Secretary on 21 November 2011 requesting a copy of the
review.[278] The Foreign
Secretary wrote back to the Chairman on 9 December stating that
the review of arms exports had been an internal FCO review and
would, therefore, not be published.[279]
207. The Committees
conclude that the Government's review of its policies and practices
on arms exports following the Arab Spring should not have been
carried out merely as "an internal review" and should
instead have been the subject of public consultation in accordance
with the Government's stated policy of transparency on arms exports.
The Committees further conclude that whilst the Government's introduction
of a new licence suspension mechanism is welcome, this is not
sufficient to ensure that arms exported from the UK are not used
for internal repression overseas because in many, if not most,
cases the arms will have left the UK before suspension occurs.
The Committees recommend that the Government in its response to
this Report sets out whether the "revised risk categorisation"
proposed by the Foreign Secretary in his Written Ministerial Statement
of 13 October 2011 will, or will not, be applied to arms export
licence applications when initially made, and whether he will
make public the "revised risk categorisation" and explain
fully how it would be applied to arms export licence decisions.
208. The Committees
conclude that whilst the Government's revocation of an unprecedented
number of 158 arms export licences following the Arab Spring is
welcome, the scale of the revocations is demonstrable evidence
that the initial judgements to approve the applications were flawed.
The Committees further conclude that there were no significant
changes in the repressive regimes concerned between the British
Government's approval of the arms export licences in question
and the start of the Arab Spring in December 2010, and that the
Arab Spring simply exposed the true nature of the repressive regimes
which had been the case all along. The Committees recommend that
the Government should apply significantly more cautious judgements
when considering arms export licence applications for goods to
authoritarian regimes "which might be used to facilitate
internal repression" in contravention of British Government
policy.
Arms export licence revocations
209. The Committee recommended in its 2011 Report
(HC686) that: "The Government provides us with full details
on arms export licences it has revoked since the beginning of
January 2011 when the recent uprisings and demonstrations in the
Middle East and North Africa started."[280]
The information requested was provided in the Government's Response
(Cm 8079) to the Committee's Report and is set out in full on
pages 21-45 of that Response.[281]
In the case of each and every one of the 158 arms export licence
revocations listed, the reason given by the Government for the
revocation was that the licence now contravened both Criteria
2 (internal repression) and Criteria 3 (provoking or prolonging
armed conflict). The Government cited the end user countries to
be Abu Dhabi, Bahrain, Egypt, Kuwait, Libya, Qatar and Tunisia.
210. With his letter to the Foreign Secretary of
18 July 2011, the Chairman asked a further 6 questions about the
Government's arms export licence revocations for countries in
the Middle East and North Africa and about the arms export licences
that remained extant.[282]
The Foreign Secretary provided the answers with his letter of
30 September 2011.[283]
The Committees' 6 questions and the Government's answers are as
follows:
(N.B. The tables referred to in the Government answers
below can be found in the tables attached to the Foreign Secretary's
letter of 30 September 2011 (see Ev 75-141).)
Committees' question:
Why does the Government consider that, notwithstanding the events
this year, in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, that the arms and
components of arms that could be used for internal repression
and which have been approved for export to Saudi Arabia and Yemen,
as detailed in Annex 4 of the Committees' Report, remain in line
with the Criteria and have not therefore been revoked by the Government?
Government's answer: Events
of the Arab Spring have underlined the importance of ensuring
that exports of UK defence equipment are subject to careful scrutiny.
The Government takes its export responsibilities very seriously,
and operates one of the most rigorous arms export control regimes
in the world. All export licence applications are considered against
the Consolidated EU and UK Export Licensing Criteria on a case
by case basis, and in the light of prevailing circumstances. We
pay particular attention to allegations of human rights abuses
in our assessment. Each assessment takes into account the intended
end use of the equipment, the behaviour of the end user, the risk
of diversion and the prevailing circumstances in the country concerned.
The Government reacted quickly to events of the Arab
Spring, reviewing all licences to all countries affected, including
Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Syria, and Yemen. The Government moved
swiftly to revoke licences where evidence existed that licences
were no longer in line with the Consolidated Criteria. As the
decisions to revoke licences demonstrate, our export licensing
policy and process allow us to respond quickly and robustly to
changing facts on the ground. Furthermore, one licence covering
sporting gun ammunition for Syria was in fact revoked following
introduction of sanctions.
At review, each application was considered against
the Consolidated Criteria on a case by case basis taking into
account the circumstances in the country concerned, the end user,
and the likelihood that the product could be used to support internal
repression. Revocations are also dependent on the number and type
of goods reviewed which vary from country to country reflecting
the export applications received and approved. For some countries
like Syria and Yemen a small number of applications are received,
and pre-existing concerns led to there being very few extant licences
to review.
The reviews identified that there were significant
differences between how Arab Governments reacted to the call for
reforms. For example, the Syrian army's brutal repression of Syrian
protestors differed markedly from the actions of the Saudi Arabian
National Guard troops. We have no evidence that Saudi forces who
were deployed to Bahrain as part of the Peninsula Shield Force,
at the request of the Bahraini Government, did anything other
than protect key installations.
Where a review was prompted by the repressive actions
of law enforcement officials policing demonstrations in a country,
it was consistent with the Criteria that licences for end users
who had no role in policing demonstrations and were unlikely to
help police demonstrations in the future, should remain in place.
The reviews also recognised that some types of equipment
may be associated with far greater risks than others. For example
machine guns could be deployed for internal repression far more
easily that components for naval equipment. The Criteria were
applied consistently, but the different circumstances, including
in relation to the issues referred to above, meant that different
conclusions were reached as regards different countries and end
users. This result is inevitable given the case by case analysis
we conduct.
In line with our standard export licensing policy
for all destinations the Government continues to monitor the situation
across the Middle East, and will continue to take into account
any changes in circumstances in its assessment of future export
licence applications or further reviews of existing licences.
Committees' question:
Since the Government announced its arms export licence review
on 18 February 2011 into licences approving arms exports to countries
in North Africa and the Middle East, how many (a) SIEL and (b)
OGEL licences have been revoked in respect of each country; and
what was the date of revocation in each case?
Government's answer: a)
Bahrain 23, Libya 61, Syria 1
b) Bahrain 14, Bahrain & Egypt 4, Egypt 3, Libya
7
See Table 1 and 2 for details of revocation dates.
Committees' question: In
respect of each of the licences revoked what was the item of military
goods and quantity of them that had previously been granted an
export licence?
Government's answer: See
Table 1and 2 for details.
Committees' question:
In respect of each of the licences revoked, what was the value
of each order which has had its licence revoked?
Government's answer: See
Table 1 and 2 for details.
Committees' question: In
respect of each country for which licences have been revoked,
how many (a) single and (b) open licences remain unrevoked; and
what (i) quantities of which military goods and (ii) military
services are covered by each of those licences? In each case,
what was the value of these goods and services?
Government's answer:
a) SIELs
a) Bahrain:
- Total number of SIELs 51 (49 Permanent and 2
Temporary)
- Military SIELs 31 (None Temporary and 31 Permanent)
b) Libya
- Total number of SIELs 18 (12 Permanent and 6
Temporary)
- Military SIELs 5 (5 Temporary and None Permanent)
c) Syria
- Total number of SIELs 6 (6 Permanent and None
Temporary)
- Military SIELs 0 (None Temporary and None Permanent)
b) OIELs
a. Total OIELs Bahrain 52 (29 Military OIELs)
b. Total OIELs Egypt 63 (31 Military OIELs)
c. Total OIELs Libya 9 (4 Military OIELs)
d. Total OIELs Syria 8 (No Military OIELs)
See Tables 3(a) and 3(b) for (i) and (ii) and (b)
details of value of licences. Also, see Table 4 for details of
OIELs
Committees' question: Having
regard to the Government's information made public to date, why
have no (a) individual and (b) open licences been revoked for
exports to:
a) Saudi Arabia
b) Syria
c) The Yemen
In respect of each of the above countries what quantities
of which military goods and which military services remain approved
for export to them, and what is the value of these goods and services?
Government's answer: Please
refer to the answer to Annex 1 Paragraph 24 Q1 [See Ev 72 of this
Report] for an explanation as to why licences to Saudi Arabia
and Yemen have not been revoked. As referred to in the above answer,
one licence for Syria has been revoked.
Please refer to Tables 3 (a) and 3(b) (i) and (ii)
for details of existing licences and their value, and Tables 4(a)
and (b) for details of OIELs.
211. The Chairman of the Committees wrote to the
Foreign Secretary on 19 October 2011[284]
asking if the Government accepted that the scale and content of
its revocation of extant arms export licences to countries in
the Middle East and North Africa represented a serious failure
by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office, the Ministry of Defence, the Department
for International Development, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
and the UK Border Agency to fulfil their first Guiding Principle
of the Export Licensing Community's Joint Mission Statement, namely:
"We shall implement effectively the UK's framework of strategic
export controls so as to ensure that sensitive goods and technology
are kept out of the wrong hands [...]"[285]
The Foreign Secretary replied on 7 January 2012 saying that the
revocations showed how seriously the Government took the Guiding
Principle. He continued: "Given the significant changes in
the region, it would seem entirely right and reasonable that risk
assessments should be updated and, in some cases, lead to a change
in decision where the licence is no longer consistent with the
Consolidated Criteria."[286]
212. The Committees have scrutinised closely the
Government's continuing approval of export licences to countries
in the Middle East and North Africa of arms and controlled goods
that might be used to facilitate internal repression. An Annex
setting out some of these licence approvals from 1 October 2010
to 31 December 2011 is at Annex 6, and updates Annex 4 of the
Committees' last Report (HC686) published on 5 April 2011.
213. The Committees
recommend that the Government continues to monitor all extant
licences for arms exports to authoritarian regimes worldwide which
might be used to facilitate internal repression in contravention
of British Government policy and to make public promptly any further
revocations that it makes.
Countries of concern
BAHRAIN
214. In its Response (Cm 8079) to the Committees'
last Report (HC686) the Government said that two arms export licences
to Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar had been revoked because increasing
tension in Bahrain put them in contravention of Criteria 2 (internal
repression) and Criteria 3 (provoking or prolonging armed conflict).
215. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 16
January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees put a further question
to the Government about UK arms exports to Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and
Qatar.[287] The question
and the Foreign Secretary's answer with his letter of 6 February
2012 are reproduced in full as follows:
Committees' question: In
table 1 [of Foreign Secretary's letter to the Chairman dated 30
September 2011] , details are provided of arms export licences
to Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar. The CAEC asked for details of
all extant arms export licences in respect of each country for
which licences have been revoked. No details of extant arms export
licences to Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar appear in any of Tables
3(a), 3(b), 4 or 4(b). Please could these details be provided
for Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar in the same format as in Tables
3(a), 3(b), 4 and 4(b).
Government's answer: The
two licences which were revoked for Abu Dhabi, Kuwait and Qatar
included Bahrain as a destination and were revoked for this reason
only. As there have been no reports of civil unrest in Abu Dhabi,
Kuwait and Qatar and we judged that licences for these countries
would still be consistent with the Criteria, licences have not
been revoked for these countries unless they are linked with another
destination for which licences are being revoked.[288]
216. Bahrain is not listed as a "Country of
Concern" in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human
Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Report, published 30 April 2012.[289]
217. Following the Arab Spring Bahrain has witnessed
essentially peaceful demonstrations which have been responded
to by often violent internal repression with deaths, imprisonments
and torture. Trials in special security courts have taken place
which, according to International Crisis Group, lacked even the
semblance of due process of law, including of medical professionals
who treated casualties of the protests. International Crisis Group
reported that: "More significant for the long term perhaps,
the violence further polarised a society already divided along
sectarian lines and left hopes for political reform in tatters,
raising serious questions about the island's stability."[290]
218. In its Response (Cm 8079) to the Committees'
last Report (HC686) the Government said that 41 arms export licences
to Bahrain had been revoked because increasing tension in Bahrain
put them in contravention of Criteria 2 (internal repression)
and Criteria 3 (provoking or prolonging armed conflict).[291]
219. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 16
January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees put 4 further questions
to the Government about UK arms exports to Bahrain.[292]
The 4 questions and the Foreign Secretary's 4 answers with his
letter of 6 February 2012[293]
are reproduced in full as follows (The Tables referred to in the
Government's responses can be found in the evidence to this Report
at Ev 75-141):
Committees' question: Why
are there arms export licences still extant for cryptographic
software and equipment employing cryptography (Tables 3(a) and
3(b)) when licences for cryptographic software and equipment employing
cryptography have been revoked (Tables 1 and 2)?
Government's answer: Table
3(a) and 3(b) identifies extant SIELs for Bahrain. There are still
11 extant licences for cryptographic software and equipment employing
cryptography. Seven of these licences were granted for civil end
use for telecommunications systems, internet/network connectivity
and data connectivity. The remaining four licences are for Government
end use to be used as a telecommunications system between two
buildings and for internet connectivity. Following the review
of licences for Bahrain in 2011 we judged that these licences
remained consistent with the Criteria following a consideration
of the goods, end user and purpose of export.
Committees' question: Why
are there export licences still extant for small arms ammunition
(Tables 3(a) and 3(b)) when licences for small arms ammunition
have been revoked (Tables 1 and 2)?
Government's answer: Table
3(a) and 3(b) identifies extant SIELs for Bahrain. There are five
extant licences for small arms ammunitions. These licences are
for sporting shooting and vermin control. Following the review
of licences for Bahrain in 2011 we judged that these licences
remained consistent with the Criteria following a consideration
of the goods, end user and purpose of the export.
Committees' question: Why
are there arms export licences for body armour (Tables 3(a) and
3(b)) when licences for body armour have been revoked (Table 2)?
Government's answer: Table
3(a) and 3(b) identifies extant SIELs for Bahrain. There is one
extant licence for a small quantity of body armour for personal
protection use only. Following the review of licences for Bahrain
in 2011 we judged that this licence remained consistent with the
Criteria following a consideration of the goods, end user and
purpose of the export.
Committees' question: Is the Government still
satisfied that none of the extant arms export licences to Bahrain
listed in Table 3(a), 3(b), 4 and 4(b) with values for SIELS "now
contravenes Criteria 2 and 3" this being the Government's
"Reason for Revocation" for every revoked arms export
licence listed in Annex 1 of the Government's Response (Cm 8079)
to the CAEC's last Report (HC 686)?
Government's answer: We
are satisfied that none of the extant arms export licences listed
in Tables 3(a), 3(b), 4 and 4(b) contravene Criteria 2 and 3.
We continue to monitor the situation in Bahrain. In line with
normal practice, export licences for Bahrain are kept under constant
review and every licence is scrutinised in light of changing facts
on the ground.
220. In the Committees' Oral evidence with Ministers
on 7 February 2012, the Foreign Secretary was asked for further
clarification of the Government's arms export policy towards Bahrain.[294]
The Foreign Secretary's reply in his letter of 28 February 2012
and attachment headed "Export licences for Bahrain in 2011"
were as follows:
At the CAEC Evidence Session on 7 February I undertook
to write with further information about the type of equipment
which is being exported to Yemen and Bahrain.
I enclose lists of all the types of licences which
have been approved and refused for both countries in 2011. All
applications are assessed carefully against the Consolidated EU
and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria. As you will see from
the lists we will only export equipment if we are satisfied that
it will not be used for internal repression, taking into account
the equipment and specified end user.
I have included information for the whole of 2011
in order to ensure that the Committees have as full a picture
as possible and in view of your request to receive this information
quickly.
Annex: Export licences for Bahrain in 2011
Three SIELs for Bahrain were refused in 2011 for:
- Communications equipment;
- Components for armoured personnel carriers'
- Anti-riot/ballistic shields
These applications were refused due to concerns that
the goods could be used for internal repression (Criterion 2 of
the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export L:icensing Criteria).
Equipment licensed for export to Bahrain in
2011:
SIELs approved in 2011
Dual Use items
- corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing
equipment for civil end use;
- communications equipment
for civil end use;
- communications equipment
for Government end use (to be used as a telecommunications system
between two buildings and for internet connectivity);
- inertial equipment
for mapping civil end use;
- NBC detection equipment
for chemical agent detection for the Government;
- air traffic control software
for civilian aviation authorities;
- toxin test kit
for the detection of toxins in food samples for civil end use;
- x-ray accelerators
for border control screening purposes.
Military rated Goods
- military aircraft ground equipment, aircrew
breathing equipment, military training aircraft, military engines
and components for Hawk aircraft for
use by the Government;
- body armour
for personal use by a named individual;
- small quantities of small arms ammunition,
guns, rifles and silencers for sporting shooting and vermin
control;
- military radars
for Government end use;
- artillery and equipment
for naval or coastal use by the Government;
- non-lethal training hand grenades
for Government end use. They are designed as an aid to basic
military training to produce a realistic loud report and
a bright flash. They are not designed for use in crowd control.
OIELs approved in 2011
Dual Use Items
- inertial equipment for
mapping for use on civil aircraft;
- hydrophone arrays
for the oil and gas industry;
- corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing
equipment for civil end use;
- radioactive sources
for civil end use.
Military Rated Goods
- tyres and inner tubes for combat aircraft,
combat helicopters, military surveillance aircraft, military training
aircraft, military transport aircraft, military utility aircraft,
military utility helicopters and tanker aircraft
for Government end use;
- engines for installation
onto trainer and combat aircraft
for Government end use;
- military improvised explosive device disposal
equipment and military utility vehicles for defusing devices
for Government end use;
- electronic warfare equipment for
naval intelligence gathering, threat warning and naval surveillance
for Government end use;
- aircraft cannon to be used on aircraft
for Government end use;
- small arms ammunition
for sporting shooting;
- components for all wheel drive vehicles
for the repair and replacement of parts for
Government end use;
- general naval vessel components
for Government end use;
- communications equipment
for temporary export to support sales.
No OIELs for Bahrain were rejected in 2011.
Since January 2011, 23 single licences and 18 open
licences for Bahrain have been revoked.[295]
221. In a subsequent Parliamentary Question to the
Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Committees'
Chairman, Sir John Stanley, asked which UK strategic export control
licences to Bahrain are currently extant, and what the nature
and quantity of the licensed goods or services are under each
licence. The Business Minister, Mark Prisk, replied on 27 March
2012:
A list of the strategic export control licences that
remain extant for Bahrain will be placed in the Libraries of the
House.[296]
The following strategic export control licences remain
extant for Bahrain:
Application Type |
Annual Report Summary
| Goods Value (£)
|
SIEL | assault rifles (1), components for assault rifles
| 3,620 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 6,585 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 630 |
SIEL | equipment for the use of NBC detection equipment
| 12,198 |
SIEL | sporting guns (1)
| 4,600 |
SIEL | high performance air traffic control software
| 100 |
SIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography
| 1,154,800 |
SIEL | components for pistols, components for sporting guns, gun silencers, pistols (1), small arms ammunition, sniper rifles (1), sporting guns (1)
| 21,204 |
SIEL | military aircraft ground equipment
| 4,421 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 282,712 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 2,870,000 |
SIEL | components for military aircrew breathing equipment
| 19,778 |
SIEL | components for military radars
| 1,034 |
SIEL | artillery, components for artillery, components for naval guns, equipment for the use of artillery, equipment for the use of naval guns, naval guns, technology for artillery, technology for naval guns
| 1,248,000 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 86,281 |
SIEL | inertial equipment
| 115,000 |
SIEL | inertial equipment
| 15,500 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 4,845 |
SIEL | components for military aircrew breathing equipment
| 5,984 |
SIEL | components for military aero-engines
| 40,429 |
SIEL | small arms ammunition
| 3,638 |
SIEL | technology for equipment employing cryptography
| 5,547 |
SIEL | X-ray accelerators
| 1,161,185 |
SIEL | body armour, civil body armour, components for body armour, direct view imaging equipment
| 21,000 |
SIEL | technology for equipment employing cryptography
| 1,068 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 2,357,700 |
SIEL | training hand grenades
| 72,300 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 627 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography
| 233,080 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography, technology for equipment employing cryptography
| 6,108 |
SIEL | components for military aircrew breathing equipment
| 759 |
SIEL | components for combat aircraft
| 253 |
SIEL | small arms ammunition
| 76,320 |
SIEL | gun silencers, sporting guns (2), sporting guns (3)
| 19,900 |
SIEL | components for military aircrew breathing equipment
| 4,443 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 692 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography, software for equipment employing cryptography
| 101,108 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 2,390 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 361,500 |
SIEL | components for launching/handling/control equipment for munitions, equipment for the use of launching/handling/control equipment for munitions, launching/handling/control equipment for munitions
| 1,232,387 |
SIEL | components for combat aircraft
| 15,840 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 5,123 |
SIEL | components for chemical agent detection equipment, technology for the use of chemical agent detection equipment
| 20,339 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 1,510 |
SIEL | components for combat aircraft
| 6,724 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 404 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 552 |
SIEL | general military aircraft components
| 1,937 |
SIEL | equipment for the use of aircraft cannons
| 1,875 |
SIEL | shotguns (2), small arms ammunition
| 1,840 |
SIEL | software for the use of military aero-engines
| 100 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 426 |
SIEL | components for military training aircraft
| 6,390 |
Application Type |
Annual Report Summary
|
OIEL | aerial target equipment, airborne electronic warfare equipment, components for aerial target equipment, components for airborne electronic warfare equipment, components for equipment for the use of aerial target equipment, components for equipment for the use of airborne electronic warfare equipment, components for equipment for the use of military training aircraft, components for military training aircraft, components for test equipment for aerial target equipment, components for test equipment for airborne electronic warfare equipment, components for training airborne electronic warfare equipment, equipment for the use of aerial target equipment, equipment for the use of airborne electronic warfare equipment, equipment for the use of military training aircraft, military training aircraft, technology for the use of aerial target equipment, technology for the use of airborne electronic warfare equipment, technology for the use of military training aircraft, technology for the use of training airborne electronic warfare equipment, test equipment for aerial target equipment, test equipment for airborne electronic warfare equipment, training airborne electronic warfare equipment
|
OIEL | software for the use of test equipment for inertial equipment, test equipment for inertial equipment
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | aircraft cannons, components for aircraft cannons
|
OIEL | components for improvised explosive device disposal equipment, improvised explosive device disposal equipment
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, technology for the use of cryptographic software
|
OIEL | aerial target equipment, components for aerial target equipment, components for missile scoring equipment, decoy flares, missile scoring equipment, software for the use of aerial target equipment, technology for the use of aerial target equipment
|
OIEL | components for inertial equipment, inertial equipment
|
OIEL | components for military devices for initiating explosives, equipment for the use of military devices for initiating explosives, military devices for initiating explosives, test equipment for military devices for initiating explosives
|
OIEL | inertial equipment
|
OIEL | components for equipment employing cryptography, cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | components for military aircraft pressurised breathing equipment, components for military communications equipment, components for military electronic equipment, military aircraft pressurised breathing equipment, military communications equipment, military electronic equipment, military flying helmets, technology for the use of military aircraft pressurised breathing equipment, technology for the use of military communications equipment, technology for the use of military electronic equipment, technology for the use of military flying helmets
|
OIEL | software for military communications equipment, technology for the use of software for military communications equipment
|
OIEL | cryptographic software
|
OIEL | fibrous/filamentary materials
|
OIEL | components for military aircraft pressurised breathing equipment, components for military communications equipment, components for military electronic equipment, military aircraft pressurised breathing equipment, military communications equipment, military electronic equipment, military flying helmets, technology for the use of military aircraft pressurised breathing equipment, technology for the use of military communications equipment, technology for the use of military electronic equipment, technology for the use of military flying helmets
|
OIEL | components for inertial equipment, inertial equipment
|
OIEL | heading sensors for hydrophone arrays, hydrophones, towed hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | aerial target equipment, airborne electronic warfare equipment, aircraft radars, components for aerial target equipment, components for airborne electronic warfare equipment, components for aircraft radars, components for military aircraft navigation equipment, components for military training aircraft, components for military video recording equipment, components for training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, components for weapons simulators, equipment for the use of aerial target equipment, equipment for the use of airborne electronic warfare equipment, equipment for the use of aircraft radars, equipment for the use of military aircraft navigation equipment, equipment for the use of military video recording equipment, equipment for the use of training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, equipment for the use of weapons simulators, military aircraft navigation equipment, military training aircraft, military video recording equipment, technology for the use of aerial target equipment, technology for the use of airborne electronic warfare equipment, technology for the use of aircraft radars, technology for the use of military aircraft navigation equipment, technology for the use of military training aircraft, technology for the use of military video recording equipment, technology for the use of training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, technology for the use of weapons simulators, test equipment for aerial target equipment, test equipment for airborne electronic warfare equipment, test equipment for aircraft radars, test equipment for military aircraft navigation equipment, test equipment for military video recording equipment, test equipment for training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, test equipment for weapons simulators, training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, weapons simulators
|
OIEL | aerial target equipment, airborne electronic warfare equipment, aircraft radars, components for aerial target equipment, components for airborne electronic warfare equipment, components for aircraft radars, components for military aircraft navigation equipment, components for military training aircraft, components for military video recording equipment, components for training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, components for weapons simulators, equipment for the use of aerial target equipment, equipment for the use of airborne electronic warfare equipment, equipment for the use of aircraft radars, equipment for the use of military aircraft navigation equipment, equipment for the use of military video recording equipment, equipment for the use of training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, equipment for the use of weapons simulators, military aircraft navigation equipment, military training aircraft, military video recording equipment, technology for the use of aerial target equipment, technology for the use of airborne electronic warfare equipment, technology for the use of aircraft radars, technology for the use of military aircraft navigation equipment, technology for the use of military training aircraft, technology for the use of military video recording equipment, technology for the use of training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, technology for the use of weapons simulators, test equipment for aerial target equipment, test equipment for airborne electronic warfare equipment, test equipment for aircraft radars, test equipment for military aircraft navigation equipment, test equipment for military video recording equipment, test equipment for training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, test equipment for weapons simulators, training equipment for electronic countermeasures equipment, weapons simulators
|
OIEL | accessories for explosive ordnance disposal equipment, components for explosive ordnance disposal equipment, components for military devices for initiating explosives, components for military firing sets, components for military improvised explosive device disposal equipment, equipment for the use of military devices for initiating explosives, explosive ordnance disposal equipment, military devices for initiating explosives, military firing sets, military improvised explosive device disposal equipment, test equipment for military devices for initiating explosives
|
OIEL | ballistic shields, body armour, bomb suits, civil body armour, components for body armour, constructions for ballistic protection of military systems, military helmets
|
OIEL | hydrophones, towed hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | components for gun laying equipment, components for military image intensifier equipment, components for weapon night sights, components for weapon sights, equipment for the use of weapon sights, gun laying equipment, military image intensifier equipment, technology for the use of equipment for the use of weapon sights, technology for the use of gun laying equipment, technology for the use of military image intensifier equipment, technology for the use of weapon night sights, technology for the use of weapon sight mounts, technology for the use of weapon sights, weapon night sights, weapon sight mounts, weapon sights
|
OIEL | accessories for airborne targeting equipment, accessories for bombing computers, accessories for film processing equipment, accessories for imaging counter-countermeasures equipment, accessories for imaging countermeasure/counter-countermeasures equipment, accessories for imaging countermeasures equipment, accessories for military cameras, accessories for military image intensifier equipment, accessories for military imaging radar equipment, accessories for military infrared/thermal imaging equipment, accessories for military photographic equipment, accessories for military video processing equipment, accessories for military video recording equipment, accessories for night vision goggles, accessories for optical target acquisition equipment, accessories for optical target designator equipment, accessories for optical target surveillance equipment, accessories for optical target tracking equipment, accessories for sensor data recorders, accessories for sensor integration equipment, accessories for simulators for military training aircraft, accessories for training equipment for military training aircraft, accessories for weapon control systems, airborne electronic warfare equipment, airborne refuelling equipment, airborne targeting equipment, aircraft radars, aircrew protective masks, anti-g/pressure suits, automatic piloting systems for parachuted loads, bomb handling equipment, bombing computers, chaff equipment, components for airborne electronic warfare equipment, components for airborne refuelling equipment, components for airborne targeting equipment, components for aircraft radars, components for aircrew protective masks, components for anti-g/pressure suits, components for automatic piloting systems for parachuted loads, components for bombing computers, components for ejector seats, components for equipment for the operation of military aircraft in confined areas, components for equipment for the use of military aero-engines, components for equipment for the use of military training aircraft, components for film processing equipment, components for helmet mounted display equipment, components for imaging counter-countermeasures equipment, components for imaging countermeasure/counter-countermeasures equipment, components for imaging countermeasures equipment, components for liquid oxygen converters, components for military aero-engines, components for military aircraft ground equipment, components for military aircraft navigation equipment, components for military aircraft pressure refuellers, components for military aircraft pressurised breathing equipment, components for military cameras, components for military containers, components for military flying helmets, components for military image intensifier equipment, components for military imaging radar equipment, components for military infrared/thermal imaging equipment, components for military parachutes, components for military parachutist equipment, components for military photographic equipment, components for military training aircraft, components for military video processing equipment, components for military video recording equipment, components for night vision goggles, components for optical target acquisition equipment, components for optical target designator equipment, components for optical target surveillance equipment, components for optical target tracking equipment, components for sensor data recorders, components for sensor integration equipment, components for simulators for military training aircraft, components for training equipment for military training aircraft, components for weapon control systems, control equipment for air-to-air missiles, control equipment for bombs, control equipment for decoy flares, control equipment for fragmentation rockets, control equipment for practice bombs, ejector seats, equipment for the operation of military aircraft in confined areas, equipment for the use of military aero-engines, equipment for the use of military training aircraft, film processing equipment, handling equipment for air-to-air missiles, handling equipment for bombs, handling equipment for decoy flares, handling equipment for fragmentation rockets, handling equipment for practice bombs, helmet mounted display equipment, imaging counter-countermeasures equipment, imaging countermeasure/counter-countermeasures equipment, imaging countermeasures equipment, launching equipment for air-to-air missiles, launching equipment for bombs, launching equipment for decoy flares, launching equipment for fragmentation rockets, launching equipment for practice bombs, liquid oxygen converters, military aero-engines, military aircraft ground equipment, military aircraft navigation equipment, military aircraft pressure refuellers, military aircraft pressurised breathing equipment, military cameras, military containers, military flying helmets, military image intensifier equipment, military imaging radar equipment, military infrared/thermal imaging equipment, military parachutes, military parachutist equipment, military parametric technical databases, military photographic equipment, military video processing equipment, military video recording equipment, night vision goggles, optical target acquisition equipment, optical target designator equipment, optical target surveillance equipment, optical target tracking equipment, sensor data recorders, sensor integration equipment, simulators for military training aircraft, software enabling equipment to function as military training aircraft, software for military training aircraft, software for the evaluation of weapon systems, software for the modelling of military operation scenarios, software for the modelling of weapon systems, software for the simulation of military operation scenarios, software for the simulation of weapon systems, software for the use of military training aircraft, technology for the use of military training aircraft, test equipment for military training aircraft, test models for the development of military training aircraft, training equipment for military training aircraft, weapon control systems
|
OIEL | goods specified by Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Export Control Order 2008 excluding: [1] Goods specified by PL5001; [2] Landmines specified by ML4 and all goods related to landmines; [3] Man Portable Air Defence Systems MANPADS and test equipment/production equipment/software/technology therefor [4] RDX or HMX explosive material or explosive material containing RDX or HMX; [5] Chemicals specified in Schedule 1 of the Chemical Weapons Convention and specified by ML7a or ML7b and associated technology; [6] Complete rocket systems including Ballistic Missile Systems/Space Launch Vehicles/Sounding Rockets and Unmanned Airborne Vehicle systems including Cruise Missile Systems/Remote Piloted Vehicles/Target Drones/Reconnaissance Drones capable of at least a 300km range; [7] Complete subsystems designed or modified for the rocket systems specified in 6 above as follows: [i] individual rocket stages; [ii] re-entry vehicles and equipment designed or modified therefore and electronics equipment specially designed for re-entry vehicles; [iii] solid or liquid propellant rocket engines having a total impulse capacity of 1.1MNs; [iv] guidance sets capable of achieving system accuracy of 3.33% or less of the range; [v] thrust vectors control systems; [vi] weapon or warhead safing/arming/fusing/firing mechanisms; [8] Specially designed production facilities or production equipment for the goods specified in 6/7 above; [9] Software specially designed of modified for the use of goods specified in 6/7/8 above
|
OIEL | equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | components for combat aircraft, components for combat helicopters, components for military surveillance aircraft, components for military training aircraft, components for military transport aircraft, components for military utility aircraft, components for military utility helicopters, components for tanker aircraft
|
OIEL | inertial equipment
|
OIEL | heading sensors for hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | technology for the use of weapon sights, weapon sights
|
OIEL | military improvised explosive device disposal equipment, military utility vehicles
|
OIEL | components for electronic warfare equipment, equipment for the use of electronic warfare equipment, software for electronic warfare equipment, technology for electronic warfare equipment
|
OIEL | components for corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
|
OIEL | components for aircraft cannons, equipment for the use of aircraft cannons, software for aircraft cannons, technology for aircraft cannons
|
OIEL | components for small arms ammunition, small arms ammunition
|
OIEL | inertial equipment, technology for inertial equipment
|
OIEL | components for all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection, components for military support vehicles, technology for all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection, technology for military support vehicles
|
OIEL | general naval vessel components
|
OIEL | command communications control and intelligence software, technology for command communications control and intelligence software
|
OIEL | components for military aero-engines, equipment for the use of military aero-engines, military aero-engines, military aircraft ground equipment, software for military aero-engines, technology for military aero-engines
|
OIEL | equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | aircraft seals, components for inertial equipment, inertial equipment
|
OITCL | bomb suits, military helmets
|
Source: A list of the strategic export control
licences that remain extant for Bahrain placed in the Libraries
of the House in response to PQ from Sir John Stanley answered
on 27 March 2012, see HC Deb 27 March 2012 col. 1136W
Values of items licensed for export have been provided
for extant Standard Individual Export Licences. No values are
given for extant Open Individual Export Licences because there
is generally no limit to the quantities that may be exported under
these licences and it is not possible for exporters to provide
this information when they make a licence application.[297]
222. The
Committees recommend that the Government in its Response to this
Report states whether it remains satisfied that none of the 97
extant UK arms export licences to Bahrain now contravenes the
Government's stated policy that: "The longstanding British
position is clear: We will not issue licences where we judge there
is a clear risk that the proposed export might provoke or prolong
regional or internal conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate
internal repression" including those licences for assault
rifles, sniper rifles, body armour, gun silencers, shotguns, small
arms ammunition, pistols, weapon sights and equipment employing
cryptography.
EGYPT
223. Egypt is not listed as a "Country of Concern"
in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human Rights and Democracy:
The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office Report, published
30 April 2012.[298]
224. In its Response (Cm 8079) to the Committees'
last Report (HC686) the Government said that 47 arms export licences
to Egypt had been revoked because increasing tension in Egypt
put them in contravention of Criteria 2 (internal repression)
and Criteria 3 (provoking or prolonging armed conflict).[299]
225. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 16
January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees put 2 further questions
to the Government about UK arms exports to Egypt.[300]
The 2 questions and the Foreign Secretary's 2 answers with his
letter of 6 February 2012[301]
are reproduced in full as follows (The Tables referred to in the
Government's responses can be found in the evidence to this Report
at Ev 75-141):
Committees' question: Why
are there arms export licences still extant for military communications
equipment (Tables 4 and 4(b)) when licences for military communications
equipment have been revoked (Table 2)?
Government's answer: Extant
licences for military communications equipment
Table A and 4 (b) identifies export licences (OIELs)
that are still extant for military communications equipment (three
in total). These permit i) temporary exports of software modules
for use during exhibitions, demonstrations, consultancy and personal
use by company employees ii) software for military equipment to
authorised agents, value added resellers and area partners for
marketing and support purposes in country iii) communications
equipment and subassemblies for military use such as software
for headsets. Following the review of licences for Egypt in February
2011 we judged that these licences remained consistent with the
Criteria following a consideration of the goods, end user and
purpose of export.
Revoked licences for military communications equipment
Table two identifies two applications for military
communications equipment and software for military communications
equipment. These two OIELs were revoked following the review of
Egypt extant licences in February. We noted that the goods would
offer capability for situational awareness, command and control.
Furthermore the second OIEL contained goods for military helmets
and components for an integrated helmet system. As the OIELs permitted
export to government linked end users, which would in practice
enable exports to the internal security forces and the police
we judged that these applications were no longer consistent with
the Criteria and the Government would request SIEL licences for
exports of this nature.
Committees' question: Is
the government still satisfied that none of the extant arms export
licences to Egypt listed in Tables 3(a), 4 and 4(b) with
values for SIELs contravene Criteria 2 and 3?
Government's answer: We
are satisfied that none of the extant arms export licences listed
in Tables 3(a), 4 and 4(b) contravene Criteria 2 and 3. We continue
to monitor the situation in Egypt. In line with normal practice,
export licences for Egypt are kept under constant review and every
licence is scrutinised in light of changing facts on the ground.
226. In a Parliamentary Question to the Secretary
of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Committees'
Chairman, Sir John Stanley, asked which UK strategic export control
licences to Egypt are currently extant, and what the nature and
quantity of the licensed or services are under each licence. The
Business Minister, Mark Prisk, replied on 27 March 2012:
A list of the strategic export control licences that
remain extant for Egypt will be placed in the Libraries of the
House.[302]
The following strategic export control licences remain
extant for Egypt:
Application Type |
Annual Report Summary
| Goods Value (£)
|
SIEL | machine tools
| 100,000 |
SIEL | explosive ordnance disposal equipment, military firing sets
| 6,065 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 1,725 |
SIEL | Toxins
| 8,547 |
SIEL | cryptographic software, software for the development of equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
| 2 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 200 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 57 |
SIEL | components for all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 1,900 |
SIEL | towed hydrophone arrays
| 1,698,300 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 6,896 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 1,540 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 120,500 |
SIEL | anti-g/pressure suits
| 90,300 |
SIEL | submersible equipment
| 5,639 |
SIEL | submersible equipment
| 21,540 |
SIEL | components for corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 28,710 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 10,038 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 1,225 |
SIEL | inertial equipment
| 3,427 |
SIEL | body armour, military helmets
| 1,884 |
SIEL | components for military radars
| 77,100 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 4,000 |
SIEL | machine tools
| 92,660 |
SIEL | inertial equipment
| 100,000 |
SIEL | chemicals used for industrial/commercial processes
| 304 |
SIEL | submersible equipment, submersible vehicles
| 991,666 |
SIEL | inertial equipment
| 1,286,075 |
SIEL | submersible equipment
| 4,308 |
SIEL | components for military helicopters
| 1,054 |
SIEL | components for military aero-engines
| 348,496 |
SIEL | submersible equipment
| 9,947 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography, software for equipment employing cryptography
| 38,944 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 558 |
SIEL | components for weapon control equipment
| 27,802 |
SIEL | components for targeting equipment, military electronic equipment, military infrared/thermal imaging equipment
| 108,650 |
SIEL | components for targeting equipment
| 10,063 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 26,191 |
SIEL | components for military combat vehicles
| 367,560 |
SIEL | weapon night sights, weapon sights
| 41,800 |
SIEL | components for military radars
| 363,254 |
SIEL | cryptographic software
| 2,746 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 11,700 |
SIEL | towed hydrophone arrays
| 2,891,566 |
SIEL | cryptographic software
| 840 |
SIEL | submersible equipment
| 9,947 |
SIEL | components for marine location systems, inertial equipment, submersible equipment, underwater electronic imaging systems
| 248,000 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 24,030 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 3,217 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 1,894 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 1,908 |
SIEL | pressure transducers
| 850 |
SIEL | numerical control software
| 7,500 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography
| 99,880 |
SIEL | machine tools
| 155,500 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 200 |
SIEL | military aircrew protective equipment
| 83,980 |
SIEL | chemicals used for pharmaceutical/healthcare production
| 1,810 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 6,097 |
SIEL | components for semi-automatic pistols, components for submachine guns, training small arms ammunition
| 8,591 |
SIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography
| 26,582 |
SIEL | components for military guidance/navigation equipment, software for military guidance/navigation equipment
| 50,507 |
SIEL | software for machine tools
| 7,500 |
SIEL | components for decoying/countermeasure equipment, equipment for the use of decoying/countermeasure equipment, software for decoying/countermeasure equipment
| 49,703 |
SIEL | components for military parachutes and equipment, military parachutes and equipment
| 112,748 |
SIEL | chemicals used for pharmaceutical/healthcare production
| 18,100 |
SIEL | equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography
| 1,699 |
SIEL | inertial equipment
| 15,500 |
SIEL | toxic gas monitoring equipment
| 334 |
SIEL | submersible equipment
| 32,300 |
SIEL | submersible equipment
| 97,940 |
SIEL | submersible equipment
| 64,620 |
SIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography
| 63,522 |
SIEL | direct view imaging equipment
| 100,000 |
SITCL | promoting the supply of all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 135,000 |
Application Type |
Annual Report Summary
|
OIEL | software for military communications equipment, technology for the use of software for military communications equipment
|
OIEL | software for the use of military communications equipment, software to simulate the function of military communications equipment, technology for the use of software to simulate the function of military communications equipment
|
OIEL | anti-friction bearings
|
OIEL | components for equipment employing cryptography, cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | components for military devices for initiating explosives, equipment for the use of military devices for initiating explosives, military devices for initiating explosives, test equipment for military devices for initiating explosives
|
OIEL | airborne refuelling equipment, aircraft cannons, aircrew protective masks, anti-g/pressure suits, attack alerting/warning equipment, chaff equipment, components for airborne refuelling equipment, components for attack alerting/warning equipment, components for combat aircraft, components for ejector seats, components for fire control equipment, components for imaging countermeasures equipment, components for military aero-engines, components for military infrared/thermal imaging equipment, equipment for the operation of military aircraft in confined areas, fire control equipment, guided missile decoying equipment, imaging countermeasures equipment, military aero-engines, military aircraft ground equipment, military aircraft pressure refuellers, military containers, military electronic equipment, military flying helmets, military infrared/thermal imaging equipment, military parachutes, software for the use of combat aircraft, technology for the use of airborne refuelling equipment, technology for the use of aircraft cannons, technology for the use of aircrew protective masks, technology for the use of anti-g/pressure suits, technology for the use of attack alerting/warning equipment, technology for the use of chaff equipment, technology for the use of combat aircraft, technology for the use of ejector seats, technology for the use of equipment for the operation of military aircraft in confined areas, technology for the use of fire control equipment, technology for the use of guided missile decoying equipment, technology for the use of imaging countermeasures equipment, technology for the use of military aero-engines, technology for the use of military aircraft ground equipment, technology for the use of military aircraft pressure refuellers, technology for the use of military containers, technology for the use of military electronic equipment, technology for the use of military flying helmets, technology for the use of military infrared/thermal imaging equipment, technology for the use of military parachutes
|
OIEL | equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | aerial target equipment, components for aerial target equipment, components for missile scoring equipment, decoy flares, missile scoring equipment, software for the use of aerial target equipment, technology for the use of aerial target equipment
|
OIEL | components for launching equipment for torpedoes, components for mine countermeasures equipment, components for mine sweeping equipment, components for naval mines, components for torpedoes, components for training equipment for mine sweeping equipment, equipment for the use of launching equipment for torpedoes, equipment for the use of mine countermeasures equipment, equipment for the use of mine sweeping equipment, equipment for the use of naval mines, equipment for the use of torpedoes, equipment for the use of training equipment for mine sweeping equipment, launching equipment for torpedoes, mine countermeasures equipment, mine sweeping equipment, software for the use of launching equipment for torpedoes, software for the use of mine countermeasures equipment, software for the use of mine sweeping equipment, software for the use of naval mines, software for the use of torpedoes, software for the use of training equipment for mine sweeping equipment, technology for the use of launching equipment for torpedoes, technology for the use of mine countermeasures equipment, technology for the use of mine sweeping equipment, technology for the use of naval mines, technology for the use of torpedoes, technology for the use of training equipment for mine sweeping equipment, test equipment for launching equipment for torpedoes, test equipment for mine countermeasures equipment, test equipment for mine sweeping equipment, test equipment for naval mines, test equipment for torpedoes, test equipment for training equipment for mine sweeping equipment, torpedoes, training equipment for mine sweeping equipment
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, technology for the use of cryptographic software
|
OIEL | NBC filters, chaff, chaff equipment, command communications control and intelligence equipment, components for chaff equipment, components for command communications control and intelligence equipment, components for corvettes, components for defensive systems against NBC agents, components for electronic warfare equipment, components for fast attack craft, components for frigates, components for heavy machine guns, components for military distress signalling equipment, components for military inflatable craft, components for military navigation equipment, components for naval acoustic equipment, components for naval communications equipment, components for naval engines, components for naval gun mountings, components for naval radars, components for naval sonar equipment, components for semi-automatic pistols, components for surface-to-air missiles, components for surface-to-surface missiles, control equipment for surface-to-air missiles, control equipment for surface-to-surface missiles, defensive systems against NBC agents, electronic warfare equipment, equipment for the use of corvettes, equipment for the use of fast attack craft, equipment for the use of frigates, equipment for the use of naval radars, equipment for the use of surface-to-air missiles, general naval vessel components, handling equipment for surface-to-surface missiles, heavy machine guns, launching equipment for surface-to-air missiles, launching equipment for surface-to-surface missiles, military distress signalling equipment, military inflatable craft, military navigation equipment, naval acoustic equipment, naval communications equipment, naval electrical equipment, naval electronic equipment, naval engines, naval gun mountings, naval radars, naval sonar equipment, semi-automatic pistols, surface-to-air missiles, surface-to-surface missiles, test equipment for military communications equipment, test equipment for naval radars, test equipment for surface-to-air missiles
|
OIEL | components for improvised explosive device disposal equipment, improvised explosive device disposal equipment
|
OIEL | equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | components for guided missile decoying equipment, components for weapon control systems, decoy flares, equipment for the use of guided missile decoying equipment, equipment for the use of weapon control systems, software for the use of guided missile decoying equipment, software for the use of weapon control systems, technology for the use of guided missile decoying equipment, technology for the use of weapon control systems, test equipment for guided missile decoying equipment, test equipment for weapon control systems
|
OIEL | software for the use of test equipment for inertial equipment, test equipment for inertial equipment
|
OIEL | accessories for explosive ordnance disposal equipment, components for explosive ordnance disposal equipment, components for military devices for initiating explosives, components for military firing sets, components for military improvised explosive device disposal equipment, equipment for the use of military devices for initiating explosives, explosive ordnance disposal equipment, military devices for initiating explosives, military firing sets, military improvised explosive device disposal equipment, test equipment for military devices for initiating explosives
|
OIEL | hydrophones, towed hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | components for submersible equipment, components for submersible vehicles, heading sensors for hydrophone arrays, high energy capacitors, metal alloy cylindrical forms, metal alloy tubes, submersible equipment
|
OIEL | equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | accessories for ground based radars, accessories for naval radars, components for ground based radars, components for naval radars, equipment for the use of ground based radars, equipment for the use of naval radars, software for ground based radars, software for naval radars, technology for ground based radars, technology for naval radars, test equipment for ground based radars, test equipment for naval radars
|
OIEL | components for combat aircraft, components for combat helicopters, components for military surveillance aircraft, components for military training aircraft, components for military transport aircraft, components for military utility aircraft, components for military utility helicopters, components for tanker aircraft
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of cryptographic software, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of software for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of cryptographic software, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | inertial equipment
|
OIEL | components for military aero-engines
|
OIEL | cutters/severing tools, detonating cord, devices for initiating explosives, explosives, linear cutting explosive charges, linear shaped cutting charges, non-military detonators, non-military firing sets, shaped charges, underwater telecommunications systems
|
OIEL | inertial equipment
|
OIEL | heading sensors for hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | fibrous/filamentary materials
|
OIEL | inertial equipment, technology for inertial equipment
|
OIEL | equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | components for equipment for the operation of military aircraft in confined areas, components for equipment for the use of artillery, components for military electronic equipment, equipment for the operation of military aircraft in confined areas, equipment for the use of artillery, general naval vessel components, military electronic equipment
|
OIEL | components for submersible vehicles, composite structures, heading sensors for hydrophone arrays, high energy capacitors, imaging cameras, metal alloy tubes, submersible equipment, syntactic foam, underwater electronic imaging systems
|
OIEL | general naval vessel components
|
OIEL | towed hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | components for combat aircraft, components for ejector seats, components for military electronic equipment, ejector seats, equipment for the use of ejector seats, equipment for the use of general military aircraft components, military aircraft ground equipment, military aircrew breathing equipment, military aircrew protective equipment, military electronic equipment, signalling devices, technology for ejector seats, technology for general military aircraft components, test models for ejector seats, test models for general military aircraft components
|
OIEL | components for military improvised explosive device decoying/detection/disposal/jamming equipment, military equipment for initiating explosives, military improvised explosive device decoying/detection/disposal/jamming equipment, munitions/ordnance detection/disposal equipment
|
OIEL | aircraft seals, components for inertial equipment, inertial equipment
|
OITCL | components for demolition devices, demolition devices
|
OITCL | body armour, components for rifles, military communications equipment, military helmets, rifles, small arms ammunition, weapon night sights, weapon sights
|
OITCL | body armour, combat shotguns, military helmets, military image intensifier equipment, rifles, small arms ammunition, sniper rifles
|
OITCL | all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
|
OITCL | assault rifles, body armour, combat shotguns, components for assault rifles, components for body armour, military helmets, small arms ammunition, wall/door breaching projectiles/ammunition
|
OITCL | assault rifles, body armour, machine guns, military helmets, military infrared/thermal imaging equipment, pistols, rifles, small arms ammunition, sniper rifles, sporting guns
|
OITCL | body armour, components for body armour, components for rifles, military helmets, rifles, small arms ammunition
|
OITCL | assault rifles, body armour, combat shotguns, components for body armour, military helmets, pistols, rifles, small arms ammunition, sniper rifles, weapon cleaning equipment, weapon sights
|
OITCL | assault rifles, components for assault rifles, small arms ammunition, weapon cleaning equipment, weapon sight mounts, weapon sights
|
OITCL | assault rifles, body armour, components for assault rifles, components for body armour, military helmets, pistols, small arms ammunition, weapon night sights, weapon sights
|
OITCL | promoting the supply of assault rifles, promoting the supply of clips for assault rifles, promoting the supply of clips for rifles, promoting the supply of clips for sniper rifles, promoting the supply of clips for sporting guns, promoting the supply of combat shotguns, promoting the supply of components for assault rifles, promoting the supply of components for rifles, promoting the supply of components for sniper rifles, promoting the supply of components for sporting guns, promoting the supply of rifles, promoting the supply of small arms ammunition, promoting the supply of sniper rifles, promoting the supply of sporting guns, promoting the supply of weapon night sights, promoting the supply of weapon sights
|
Source: A list of the strategic export control
licences that remain extant for Bahrain placed in the Libraries
of the House in response to PQ from Sir John Stanley answered
on 27 March 2012, see HC Deb 27 March 2012 col. 1136W
Values of items licensed for export have been provided
for extant Standard Individual Export Licences. No values are
given for extant Open Individual Export Licences because there
is generally no limit to the quantities that may be exported under
these licences and it is not possible for exporters to provide
this information when they make a licence application.[303]
227. On
26 April 2012 the FCO Minister Alistair Burt wrote to the Chairman
of the CAEC, Sir John Stanley, as follows:
Egypt and Arms Export Licensing
The presidential elections in Egypt are due to take
place next month. I thought it would be helpful to provide you
with a view of the current political situation, together with
information on how we are handling export licence applications
to that country.
Current Political Situation
There continues to be frustration among the political
class about the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces' (SCAF) handling
of the transition. The Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is increasing the
pressure on the interim government and threatening to call for
its replacement by one based on Parliamentary representation,
through a vote of no-confidence. This reflects increasing public
signs of tension between the MB and the SCAF.
The parliamentary elections marked an important step
in Egypt's political transition. The MB's block, Democratic Alliance,
secured about 47% of the sets in the Lower House and the Salafi
alliance 24%. Secular/liberal groups have about 16%, former regime
elements 3%, and other parties and independents the rest. Elections
for the Upper House passed peacefully, and delivered another commanding
Islamist performance: the MB secured 58% of the seats, and the
Salafis 25%.
Voting for the Presidential elections is scheduled
for 23/24 May, final results on 21 June and handover to civilian
rule by 1 July. The Supreme Presidential Election Committee (SPEC)
announced on 14 April 12 that ten of the 23 Presidential candidates
had been disqualified, including the Muslim Brotherhood candidate
Khairat el Shater, and former Head of the Ghad party Ayman Nour.
We understand that the SPEC has now upheld rulings disqualifying
all ten candidates.
On 24 March, both Houses of the Egyptian Parliament
elected the Constitutional Assembly (CA) in charge of drafting
Egypt's new Constitution. Many of the liberal and secular parties
walked out in protest at what they regarded as Islamist domination
of the process and the nominees. On 10 April, an Egyptian court
suspended the CA - as a result of a lawsuit filed by activists
and liberals. It now seems unlikely that the drafting of the new
Constitution will be in place before the handover of power on
1 July. We believe it is important that the drafting of a new
Constitution is completed through an inclusive process, and delivers
a Constitution which represents the interests of all the Egyptian
people.
There are a number of areas where we have concerns
about human rights in Egypt. These include limits imposed by the
authorities on freedom of expression; the use of unacceptable
violence against peaceful protesters; an increase in the number
of prosecutions of bloggers and activists for criticising the
authorities; increasing use of military trials for civilians;
virginity tests on women and allegations of torture and cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment at the hands of the security services.
In May 2010 amendments had been introduced to limit
the application of the Emergency Law to terrorism and drug crimes.
However, on 11 September 2011, the Supreme Council of the Armed
Forces (SCAF) reinstated the full powers of the Emergency Law,
as a response to growing concerns about the security situation,
including the storming of the Israeli Embassy in Cairo.
Freedom of association has been progressively restricted
over the past year, with some civil society groups, particularly
those working on human rights and transparency, facing Government
obstruction and harassment. This culminated in raids on 29 December
against local and international NGOs accused of taking foreign
funding illegally while not being properly registered. Employees
of these NGOs were summoned to stand trial and placed under a
travel ban. On 1 March, after intense negotiations and US lobbying,
the Egyptians lifted the travel ban on some NGO staff, allowing
US nationals to leave Egypt. However, broader NGO issues (registration
requirements, harassment of Egyptian NGO staff) and wider concerns
about commitment of the SCAF and Egyptian government to democracy
remain.
We continue to raise these and other concerns with
the Egyptian authorities.
Export Licences for Egypt
You will already be aware that, as events unfolded
in Egypt in February 2011, the Government urgently reviewed all
existing export licence applications and those already issued.
We started a revocation process within 3 days of the events unfolding.
We revoked 36 individual licences and removed Egypt as a destination
from eight open licences, with immediate effect. The goods included
components for aircraft, components for armoured personnel carriers
and secure communications equipment.
Subsequently we have taken steps to ensure that export
licence applications for Egypt are scrutinised very carefully.
Applications are assessed on a case-by-case basis, taking account
of the current political situation and other events on the ground,
factoring in the latest information and analysis from our Embassy
in Cairo. We pay particular attention to and make a full assessment
of the risk that goods might be used in internal repression (Criterion
2) and/or used to aggravate existing tensions in the country (Criterion
3).
Given the use of excessive force against demonstrators
in Egypt, all applications for police and military end-users are
scrutinised particularly carefully. Ministers have been and continue
to be consulted on all applications for equipment where
there is a potential risk that the goods could be used for internal
repression. Taking into account the end user and the nature of
the equipment, applications will only be approved where we are
satisfied that there is not a clear risk that the goods might
be used in contravention of Criteria 2 and 3.
We are aware of the reports that UK-manufactured
tear gas has been used in Egypt. No licences for the export of
tear gas to Egypt have been granted since 1999. Since that time
UK export controls have been radically overhauled including through
the passing of the Export Control Act 2002 and the adoption of
the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria.[304]
228. The
Committees recommend that the Government in its Response to this
Report states whether it remains satisfied that none of the 124
extant UK arms export licences to Egypt now contravenes the Government's
stated policy that: "The longstanding British position is
clear: We will not issue licences where we judge there is a clear
risk that the proposed export might provoke or prolong regional
or internal conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal
repression" including those licences for body armour, weapon
night sights, weapon sights, components for semi-automatic pistols,
semi-automatic pistols, components for submachine guns, components
for rifles, rifles, small arms ammunition, combat shotguns, assault
rifles, sniper rifles, pistols and cryptography .
LIBYA
229. Libya is listed as a "Country of Concern"
in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human Rights and Democracy:
The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office Report, published
30 April 2012.[305]
230. In its Response (Cm 8079) to the Committees'
last Report (HC686) the Government said that 72 arms export licences
to Libya had been revoked because increasing tension in Libya
put them in contravention of Criteria 2 (internal repression)
and Criteria 3 (provoking or prolonging armed conflict).[306]
231. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 16
January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees put a further question
to the Government about UK arms exports to Libya.[307]
The question and the Foreign Secretary's answer with his letter
of 6 February 2012[308]
are reproduced in full as follows (The Tables referred to in the
Government's responses can be found in the evidence to this Report
at Ev 75-141):
Committees' question: Is
the Government still satisfied that none of the extant licences
for Libya listed in Tables 3(a), 3(b), 4 and 4(b) with values
for SIELs contravene Criteria 2 and 3?
Government's answer: We
are satisfied that none of the extant arms export licences listed
in Tables 3(a), 3(b), 4 and 4(b) contravene Criteria 2 and 3.
We continue to monitor the situation in Libya. In line with normal
practice, export licences for Libya are kept under constant review
and every licence is scrutinised in light of changing facts on
the ground.
232. In a Parliamentary Question to the Secretary
of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Committees'
Chairman, Sir John Stanley, asked which UK strategic export control
licences to Libya are currently extant, and what the nature and
quantity of the licensed or services are under each licence. The
Business Minister, Mark Prisk, replied on 27 March 2012:
The following strategic export control licences remain
extant for Libya:
Application type
| Annual report summary
| Goods value (£)
|
SIEL | neutron generators
| 272,023 |
SIEL | inertial equipment
| 32,579 |
SIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography
| 77,093,000 |
SIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography
| 77,093,000 |
SIEL | cryptographic software
| 43,354 |
SIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography
| 2,032,500 |
SIEL | cryptographic software
| 210 |
SIEL | corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 3,122 |
SIEL | devices for initiating explosives, linear cutting explosive charges
| 102,725 |
SIEL | components for munitions/ordnance detection/disposal equipment, military equipment for initiating explosives, munitions/ordnance detection/disposal equipment
| 137,152 |
SIEL | bomb suits, components for bomb suits, military helmets
| 94,490 |
SIEL | components for military equipment for initiating explosives
| 2,500 |
SIEL | components for military equipment for initiating explosives, military equipment for initiating explosives
| 16,950 |
SIEL | Libyan bank notes and coins
| 1,088,560 |
SIEL | Libyan bank notes and coins
| 31,000,000 |
SITCL | all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 163,500 |
SITCL | all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 145,000 |
SITCL | all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 233,170 |
Application type
| Annual report summary
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, technology for the use of cryptographic software
|
OIEL | components for improvised explosive device disposal equipment, improvised explosive device disposal equipment
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | heading sensors for hydrophone arrays, hydrophones, towed hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of cryptographic software, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OITCL | all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
|
Source: HC Deb 27 March 2012 col. 1136-37W
Values of items licensed for export have been provided
for extant Standard Individual Export Licences. No values are
given for extant Open Individual Export Licences because there
no [sic] generally no limit to the quantities that may be exported
under these licences and it is not possible for exporters to provide
this information when they make a licence application.[309]
233. The
Committees recommend that the Government in its Response to this
Report states whether it remains satisfied that none of the 24
extant UK arms export licences to Libya now contravenes the Government's
stated policy that: "The longstanding British position is
clear: We will not issue licences where we judge there is a clear
risk that the proposed export might provoke or prolong regional
or internal conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal
repression" including those licences for all-wheel drive
vehicles with ballistic protection and cryptography .
SAUDI ARABIA
234. Saudi Arabia is listed as a "Country of
Concern" in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human
Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Report, published 30 April 2012.[310]
235. In Annex 4 to its last Report (HC686) published
on 5 April 2011, the Committees listed selected UK arms export
licence approvals to countries in the Middle East and North Africa
of arms or components of arms that could be used for internal
repression. Those listed as approved for Saudi Arabia in 2009
were: components for combat aircraft, CS hand grenades, tear gas/irritant
ammunition, tear gas/riot control agents, sniper rifles, small
calibre artillery ammunition and small arms ammunition. Those
listed and approved in 2010 up to 30 September of that year were:
components for combat aircraft, sniper rifles, armoured personnel
carriers, small arms ammunition and components for combat aircraft.[311]
236. Following the Government's Response (Cm 8079)
to the Committees' last Report, the Chairman of the Committees
wrote to the Foreign Secretary on 18 July 2011 asking why no individual
or open licences had been revoked for exports to Saudi Arabia,
and also asking which military goods and which military services
remain approved for export to Saudi Arabia and the value of those
goods and services.[312]
The Committees question and the Foreign Secretary's reply with
his letter to the Committees' Chairman of 30 September 2011[313]
as to why no arms export licences to Saudi Arabia have been revoked
are reproduced in paragraph 210 above.
Details of the extant licences to Saudi Arabia, including
the values of extant Military SIELs, provided with the Foreign
Secretary's reply to the Committees' Chairman of 30 September
2011, can be found in the evidence to this Report at Ev 99-121.
237. In the House of Commons debate on the Committees'
last Report, which took place on 20 October 2011, the Chairman
of the Committees highlighted the possible use for internal repression
of some of the UK arms exports approved to Saudi Arabia, as detailed
in the Tables set out in Ev 75-141. He said:
[...]I intend to offer hon. Members the details of
just one little box among the multitude of boxes relating to extant
export licences to Saudi Arabia. It refers to
"assault rifles, blank ammunition, components
for assault rifles, components for general purpose machine guns,
components for machine pistols, components for pistols, components
for rifles, components for semi-automatic pistols, components
for submachine guns, general purpose machine guns, machine pistols,
pistols, rifles, semi-automatic pistols, submachine guns, training
small arms ammunition".
That is just one little box among a multitude, and
hon. Members will immediately see that each and every one of the
items to which I have referred is usable for internal repression.[314]
238. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 16
January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees put a further question
to the Government about UK arms exports to Saudi Arabia.[315]
The question and the Foreign Secretary's answer with his letter
of 6 February 2012 are reproduced in full as follows (The Tables
referred to in the Government's responses can be found in the
evidence to this Report Ev 75-141):
Committees' question: Is
the Government still satisfied that none of the extant arms export
licences to Saudi Arabia listed in Tables 3(a), 3(b), 4 and 4(b)
with values for SIELs contravene Criteria 2 and 3?
Government's answer: We
are clear that the identified SIELs do not contravene Criteria
2 and 3. We examined extant licences following the unrest in Saudi
Arabia and we were satisfied that licences remained and continue
to remain consistent with the Criteria. To date, there is no evidence
that UK supplied equipment has been used in breach of the Criteria
in Saudi Arabia, or in Bahrain where Saudi forces were deployed
to protect installations as part of the Peninsula Shield force,
at the legitimate request of the Bahraini Government, In line
with normal practice, export licences for Saudi Arabia are kept
under constant review and every licence is scrutinised in light
of changing facts on the ground.[316]
239. The
Committees recommend that the Government states in its Response
to this Report whether it applies different or the same considerations
in deciding whether or not to approve arms export licences to
Saudi Arabia to those applied to other countries in the region
and, if different, what those considerations are. The Committees
further recommend that the Government in its Response states whether
it remains satisfied that none of the 288 extant UK arms export
licences to Saudi Arabia now contravenes the Government's stated
policy that: "The longstanding British position is clear:
We will not issue licences where we judge there is a clear risk
that the proposed export might provoke or prolong regional or
internal conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal
repression" including those licences for:
Components for armoured fighting
vehicles, components for armoured personnel carriers, armoured
personnel carriers, ground vehicle military communications equipment,
components for military combat vehicles, components for military
communications equipment, components for water cannon, components
for sniper rifles, components for weapon sights, weapon sights,
gun silencers, small arms ammunition, sniper rifles, technology
for military communications equipment, technology for sniper rifles,
technology for the use of sniper rifles, assault rifles, components
for assault rifles, components for general purpose machine guns,
components for machine pistols, components for pistols, components
for rifles, components for semi-automatic pistols, components
for submachine guns, general purpose machine guns, machine pistols,
pistols, rifles, semi-automatic pistols, submachine guns, hand
grenades, components for machine guns, components for military
support vehicles, military combat vehicles.
SYRIA
240. Syria is listed as a "Country of Concern"
in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human Rights and Democracy:
The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office Report, published
30 April 2012.[317]
241. In its Response (Cm 8079) to the Committees'
last Report (HC686) the Government indicated that no arms export
licences to Syria had been revoked.[318]
However, the Foreign Secretary in Table 1, SIEL revocations since
18 February 2011, provided details of one licence to Syria for
military cargo vehicles and components for military cargo vehicles
that had been revoked.[319]
242. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 16
January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees put 2 further questions
to the Government about UK arms exports to Syria.[320]
The 2 questions and the Foreign Secretary's 2 answers with his
letter of 6 February 2012[321]
are reproduced in full as follows (The Tables referred to in the
Government's responses can be found in the evidence to this Report
at Ev 75-141):
Committees' question: Is
the figure of only one arms export licence revocation to Syria
stated in Annex B, paragraph 1, this being for military cargo
vehicles and components for military cargo vehicles, correct given
that a further licence revocation of small arms ammunition to
Syria was detailed by the BIS Minister Mark Prisk in his Written
Answer to Sir John Stanley on October 10 (Column 258W)?
Government's answer: There
has been one licence revocation for Syria for small arms ammunition.
The licence for military cargo vehicles and components for military
cargo vehicles is in fact a licence that was revoked for Libya
and not for Syria.
Committees' question: Is
the Government still satisfied that none of the extant licences
for Syria listed in Table 4 with values for SIELs, including the
licences relating to equipment employing cryptography, contravene
Criteria 2 and 3?
Government's answer: We
are satisfied that none of the extant arms export licences listed
in Table 4 contravene Criteria 2 and 3. We continue to monitor
the situation in Syria. In line with normal practice, export licences
for Syria are kept under constant review and every licence is
scrutinised in light of changing facts on the ground.
243. In a Parliamentary Question to the Secretary
of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Committees'
Chairman, Sir John Stanley, asked which UK strategic export control
licences to Syria are currently extant, and what the nature and
quantity of the licensed or services are under each licence. The
Business Minister, Mark Prisk, replied on 27 March 2012:
The following strategic export control licences remain
extant for Syria:
Application type
| Annual report summary
| Goods value (£)
|
SITCL | Promoting the supply of all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 201,064 |
SITCL | All-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 201,064 |
SIEL | Components for general industrial production equipment
| 137,737 |
SIEL | Chemicals used for industrial/commercial processes
| 10,000 |
SIEL | Chemicals used for industrial/commercial processes
| 10,200 |
SIEL | Personal protective equipment
| 13,454 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 199,209 |
Application type
| Annual report summary
|
OITCL | All-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
|
OIEL | Heading sensors for hydrophone arrays, hydrophones, towed hydrophone arrays
|
Source: HC Deb 27 March 2012 col. 1137W
Values of items licensed for export have been provided
for extant Standard Individual Export Licences. No values are
given for extant Open Individual Export Licences because there
no [sic] generally no limit to the quantities that may be exported
under these licences and it is not possible for exporters to provide
this information when they make a licence application.[322]
244. The
Committees recommend that the Government in its Response to this
Report states whether it remains satisfied that none of the 9
extant UK arms export licences to Syria now contravenes the Government's
stated policy that: "The longstanding British position is
clear: We will not issue licences where we judge there is a clear
risk that the proposed export might provoke or prolong regional
or internal conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal
repression" including those licences for all-wheel drive
vehicles with ballistic protection and cryptography .
TUNISIA
245. Tunisia is not listed as a "Country of
Concern" in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human
Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Report, published 30 April 2012.[323]
246. In its Response (Cm 8079) to the Committees'
last Report (HC686) the Government indicated that 2 arms export
licences to Tunisia had been revoked because increasing tension
in Tunisia put them in contravention of Criteria 2 (internal repression)
and Criteria 3 (provoking or prolonging armed conflict).[324]
247. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 16
January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees put 2 further questions
to the Government about UK arms exports to Tunisia.[325]
The questions and the Foreign Secretary's 2 answers with his letter
of 6 February 2012[326]
are reproduced in full as follows (The Tables referred to in the
Government's responses can be found in the evidence to this Report
at Ev 75-141):
Committees' question: Why
were the arms export licence revocations to Tunisia detailed in
the Government's response (Cm 8079) not included in Table 1 and/or
2?
Government's answer: Tables
1 and 2 were produced in answer to a question which asked about
revocations made since the Government announced its review of
licences on 18 February 2011. The licences in question were revoked
earlier.
Committees' question: The
CAEC asked for details of all extant arms export licences in respect
of each country for which licences have been revoked. No details
of extant arms export licences to Tunisia appear in any of Tables
3(a), 3(b), 4 or 4(b). Please could these details be provided
for Tunisia in the same format as in Tables 3(a), 3(b), 4 and
4(b).
Government's answer: As
noted above the tables were produced in response to a question
which excluded the Tunisia revocations and therefore we did not
include details of the extant licences for Tunisia. Tables with
details of the extant licences for Tunisia similar to those provided
for other countries are enclosed with this reply. [The Tables
are included in the evidence to this Report at Ev 160]
248. In a Parliamentary Question to the Secretary
of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Committees'
Chairman, Sir John Stanley, asked which UK strategic export control
licences to Tunisia are currently extant, and what the nature
and quantity of the licensed or services are under each licence.
The Business Minister, Mark Prisk, replied on 27 March 2012:
The following strategic export control licences remain
extant for Tunisia:
Application type
| Annual report summary
| Goods value (£)
|
SIEL | Components for control equipment for man portable air defence systems
| 16,320 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 4,200,000 |
SIEL | Components for aircraft radars
| 58,232 |
SIEL | Military helmets
| 2,568 |
SIEL | Corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
| 7,381 |
SIEL | Components for military improvised explosive device disposal equipment
| 15,058 |
SIEL | Animal pathogens
| 10 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 320,000 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 544 |
SIEL | Components for military improvised explosive device decoying/detection/disposal/jamming equipment
| 20,854 |
SIEL | Goods treated for signature suppression for military use
| 3,114,000 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 270 |
SIEL | Military support vehicles
| 25,000 |
SIEL | Components for equipment employing cryptography
| 170 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 750,100 |
SIEL | Controlled atmosphere furnaces
| 825,000 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 9,570 |
SIEL | Civil NBC detection systems, components for civil NBC detection systems
| 28,591 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 194 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 268 |
SIEL | Equipment employing cryptography
| 1,867 |
SIEL | Components for military support aircraft
| 720,170 |
SIEL | Components for equipment for the operation of military aircraft in confined areas
| 480,127 |
SIEL | Goods treated for signature suppression for military use
| 65,000 |
SITCL | All-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 135,000 |
Application type
| Annual report summary
|
OIEL | Cryptographic software
|
OIEL | Software for military communications equipment, technology for the use of software for military communications equipment
|
OIEL | Software for the use of military communications equipment, software to simulate the function of military communications equipment, technology for the use of software to simulate the function of military communications equipment
|
OIEL | Components for equipment employing cryptography, cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of cryptographic software, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | Cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | Heading sensors for hydrophone arrays, hydrophones, towed hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | Components for military training aircraft, equipment for the use of military transport aircraft, general military aircraft components, military aircraft ground equipment, technology for the use of equipment for the use of military transport aircraft, technology for the use of military aircraft ground equipment, technology for the use of military transport aircraft
|
OIEL | Cutters/severing tools, detonating cord, devices for initiating explosives, explosives, linear cutting explosive charges, linear shaped cutting charges, non-military detonators, non-military firing sets, shaped charges, underwater telecommunications systems
|
OIEL | Inertial equipment
|
OIEL | Heading sensors for hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | Components for military radars, military software, technology for military radars
|
OIEL | General naval vessel components, technology for general naval vessel components
|
OIEL | Components for corrosion resistant chemical manufacturing equipment
|
OIEL | Fibrous/filamentary materials
|
OIEL | Inertial equipment, technology for inertial equipment
|
OIEL | Components for combat aircraft, components for combat helicopters, components for military aero-engines, components for military aircraft ground equipment, components for military aircrew breathing equipment, components for military helicopters, components for military support aircraft, components for military training aircraft, components for naval engines, equipment for the use of combat aircraft, equipment for the use of combat helicopters, equipment for the use of military aero-engines, equipment for the use of military aircraft ground equipment, equipment for the use of military aircrew breathing equipment, equipment for the use of military helicopters, equipment for the use of military support aircraft, equipment for the use of military training aircraft, equipment for the use of naval engines, general military aircraft components, technology for combat aircraft, technology for combat helicopters, technology for military aero-engines, technology for military aircraft ground equipment, technology for military aircrew breathing equipment, technology for military helicopters, technology for military support aircraft, technology for military training aircraft, technology for naval engines
|
OIEL | Components for submersible vehicles, composite structures, heading sensors for hydrophone arrays, high energy capacitors, imaging cameras, metal alloy tubes, submersible equipment, syntactic foam, underwater electronic imaging systems
|
OIEL | Command communications control and intelligence software, technology for command communications control and intelligence software
|
OIEL | Small arms ammunition
|
OIEL | Aircraft seals, components for inertial equipment, inertial equipment
|
OIEL | Neutron generators, non-military detonators, non-military firing sets
|
OITCL | All-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
|
Source: HC Deb 27 March 2012 cols. 1137-39W
Values of items licensed for export have been provided
for extant Standard Individual Export Licences. No values are
given for extant Open Individual Export Licences because there
are generally no limit to the quantities that may be exported
under these licences and it is not possible for exporters to provide
this information when they make a licence application.[327]
249. The
Committees recommend that the Government in its Response to this
Report states whether it remains satisfied that none of the 47
extant UK arms export licences to Tunisia now contravenes the
Government's stated policy that: "The longstanding British
position is clear: We will not issue licences where we judge there
is a clear risk that the proposed export might provoke or prolong
regional or internal conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate
internal repression" including those licences for military
support vehicles, all-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection,
small arms ammunition and cryptography .
YEMEN
250. Yemen is listed as a "Country of Concern"
in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human Rights and Democracy:
The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office Report, published
30 April 2012.[328]
251. In its Response (Cm 8079) to the Committees'
last Report (HC686) the Government indicated that no arms export
licences to Yemen had been revoked.[329]
252. In his letter to the Foreign Secretary of 16
January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees put a further question
to the Government about UK arms exports to Yemen.[330]
The question and the Foreign Secretary's answer with his letter
of 6 February 2012[331]
are reproduced in full as follows (The Tables referred to in the
Government's responses can be found in the evidence to this Report
at Ev 75-141):
Committees' question: Is
the Government still satisfied that none of the extant arms export
licences to Yemen listed in tables 3(a), 3(b) and 4 with values
for SIELs, . including licences relating to equipment employing
cryptography, military cameras and body armour, contravene Criteria
2 and 3?
Government's answer: We
are clear that the identified extant SIEL licences for equipment
employing cryptography, military cameras and body armour do not
contravene Criteria 2 and 3. In line with normal practice, export
licences for Yemen are kept under constant review and every licence
is scrutinised in light of changing facts on the ground.
253. In the Committees' Oral evidence with Ministers
on 7 February 2012, the Foreign Secretary was asked for further
clarification of the Government's arms export policy towards Yemen.[332]
The Foreign Secretary's reply in his letter of 28 February 2012
and attachment headed "Export licences for Yemen in 2011"
were as follows:
At the CAEC Evidence Session on 7 February I undertook
to write with further information about the type of equipment
which is being exported to Yemen and Bahrain.
I enclose lists of all the types of licences which
have been approved and refused for both countries in 2011. All
applications are assessed carefully against the Consolidated EU
and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria. As you will see from
the lists we will only export equipment if we are satisfied that
it will not be used for internal repression, taking into account
the equipment and specified end user.
I have included information for the whole of 2011
in order to ensure that the Committees have as full a picture
as possible and in view of your request to receive this information
quickly.
Export licences for Yemen in 2011
We receive very few export licence applications for
Yemen. Equipment licensed for export in 2011:
SIELS approved in 2011.
Dual Use Items
- A portable chemical identifier
returned after repair in the UK to be used by the security authorities
in Yemen.
Military Rated Goods
Body armour and one vehicle to be used by UN personnel;
Armoured vehicle for use by the UN;
One engine for the C130 Hercules military transport
aircraft used in Yemen to assist international partners.
Two SIELS for Yemen were refused in 2011 for:
These applications were refused due to concerns that
the goods could be used for internal repression (Criterion 2 of
the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria).
Open Licences refused
- components for corrosion resistant
chemical manufacturing equipment to a civil end user.
No export licences for Yemen were revoked in 2011.[333]
254. In a Parliamentary Question to the Secretary
of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Committees'
Chairman, Sir John Stanley, asked which UK strategic export control
licences to Yemen are currently extant, and what the nature and
quantity of the licensed or services are under each licence. The
Business Minister, Mark Prisk, replied on 27 March 2012:
The following strategic export control licences remain
extant for Yemen:
Application type
| Annual report summary
| Goods value (£)
|
SITCL | All-wheel drive vehicles with ballistic protection
| 70,000 |
SIEL (Permanent) | Body armour
| 43,288 |
SIEL (Permanent) | Military aero-engines
| 819,930 |
SIEL (Permanent) | Body armour
| 1,444 |
SIEL (Permanent) | Components for military cameras, equipment for the use of military cameras, technology for the use of military cameras, test equipment for military cameras
| 85,858 |
Application type
| Annual report summary
|
OIEL | Cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of cryptographic software, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | Cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of cryptographic software, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of software for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | Heading sensors for hydrophone arrays, hydrophones, towed hydrophone arrays
|
OIEL | Cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
OIEL | Components for inertial equipment, inertial equipment
|
OIEL | Components for equipment employing cryptography, cryptographic software, equipment employing cryptography, software for the use of equipment employing cryptography, technology for the use of equipment employing cryptography
|
Source: HC Deb 27 March 2012 cols. 1139-40W
Values of items licensed for export have been provided
for extant Standard Individual Export Licences. No values are
given for extant Open Individual Export Licences because there
no [sic] generally no limit to the quantities that may be exported
under these licences and it is not possible for exporters to provide
this information when they make a licence application.[334]
255. The
Committees recommend that the Government in its Response to this
Report states whether it remains satisfied that none of the 11
extant UK arms export licences to Yemen now contravenes the Government's
stated policy that: "The longstanding British position is
clear: We will not issue licences where we judge there is a clear
risk that the proposed export might provoke or prolong regional
or internal conflicts, or which might be used to facilitate internal
repression" including those licences for all-wheel drive
vehicles with ballistic protection, body armour, components and
equipment for military cameras and cryptographic equipment and
technology.
ARGENTINA
256. Argentina is not listed as a "Country of
Concern" in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human
Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Report, published 30 April 2012.[335]
The Committees have compiled from the Government's quarterly arms
export reports details of the arms export licences to Argentina
that the Government approved from 1 April 2010 up to 31 December
2011. These are set out in Annex 9.
257. On 26 April 2012, the Foreign Secretary wrote
to the Committees' Chairman advising the Committees of a change
in the Government's export controls to Argentina and of a Written
Ministerial Statement being made by the Business Secretary that
day.[336] The Foreign
Secretary's letter was as follows:
I am writing to advise you about a change in our
export controls to Argentina.
The Business Secretary has today laid before the
House a Written Ministerial Statement relating to a tightening
of our export controls to Argentina. I enclose a copy. Since 1998
our approach has been to refuse exports which would allow Argentina
to enhance her military capabilities but to approve licences for
goods which maintained existing capability. As members of the
Committees are aware from our response to questions on the BIS
quarterly reports, our exports to Argentina have included components
for aircraft and naval vessels for maintenance purposes.
In view of recent Argentine actions aimed at the
economic interests of the Falkland Islanders, the Government has
concluded that it is now appropriate to review this policy. With
effect from today we are introducing new restrictions on the export
of licensable trade and brokering to the Argentine military. In
future no licences will be granted for military or dual use goods
for military end users in Argentina unless there are compelling
exceptional reasons to do so. Extant licences will be reviewed
with a view to revoking any which are not consistent with this
new policy.
The Business Secretary's Written Ministerial Statement
was as follows:
Export Control Policy
The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation
and Skills (Vince Cable): I would like
to inform the House of a change of policy on the licensing of
exports of, and trade by British persons (trafficking and brokering)
in, controlled goods and technology to military end-users in Argentina.
Previous policy dating from 1998 required the refusal of licences
for exports and trade which would enhance Argentine military capabilities
but permitted licences for goods which maintained existing capability.
In practice this has meant the authorisation of the export and
trade of components for maintenance purposes.
The Government have reviewed this policy in the light
of recent actions by the Argentine Government aimed at harming
the economic interests of the Falkland Islanders. We are determined
to ensure that no British licensable exports or trade have the
potential to be used by Argentina to impose an economic blockade
on the Falkland Islanders or inhibit their legitimate rights to
develop their own economy.
New restrictions on the export and trade of licensable
goods with the Argentine military will now be introduced with
immediate effect. In future no licences shall be granted for any
military or dual-use goods and technology being supplied to military
end-users in Argentina, except in exceptional circumstances. We
will review extant licences for military goods to the Argentine
armed forces with a view to revoking any that are not consistent
with the revised policy. This decision will not affect licences
for items intended for end-users other than the Argentine military.[337]
258. The
Committees conclude that the Government's decision to tighten
controls on the licensing of, and trade in (trafficking and broking),
controlled goods and technology to military end users in Argentina
is welcome. The Committees recommend that the Government states
in its Response to this Report:
a) what are the exceptional circumstances
in which the Government is still willing to consider approving
export licences for military or dual-use goods being supplied
to military end users in Argentina;
b) what licences for military goods
to Argentine armed forces have been revoked;
c) what UK strategic export control
licences for Argentina remain extant; and
d) what steps the Government is
taking to get the US Government, the Governments of EU Member
States, and the Governments of other countries who export military
goods, military technology and dual-use goods to Argentina to
make the same change of policy as that announced by the British
Government.
CHINA
259. China is listed as a "Country of Concern"
in the FCO's latest Human Rights report, Human Rights and Democracy:
The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office Report, published
30 April 2012.[338]
260. The EU arms embargo to China was adopted by
the European Council on 27 June 1989 in response to the events
in Tiananmen Square in June 1989.[339]
The arms embargo, was adopted in the form of a European Council
Declaration (or Common Policy) prior to the creation of the EU's
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and so is not legally
binding on Member States. Our predecessor Committees examined
the arms embargo in detail and concluded that it was of political
importance in that it provided a strong message in relation to
the promotion of human rights in China.[340]
261. The potential lifting of the embargo was first
discussed at an EU-level in 2004, when both France and Germany
argued that the reasons for first imposing the embargo (chiefly
Tiananmen Square) were out-dated. The 2004 European Council "reaffirmed
the political will to continue to work towards lifting the arms
embargo" and recalled the importance of the EU Code of Conduct
on Arms Exports in particular criteria regarding human rights,
stability and security in the region and the national security
of friendly and allied countries in preventing an increase in
arms sales to China from EU Member States.[341]
Some in the EU, led by France and Spain, have again called for
the lifting of the embargo.[342]
262. In its last Report (HC686) published on 5 April
2011, the Committees made the following recommendation with regard
to the arms export embargo on China:
We recommend that in view of the continuing serious
human rights violations taking place in China, the Government
maintains its position of fully supporting the retention of the
EU arms embargo on China.[343]
In its Response (Cm 8079) the Government replied:
There is a broad consensus within the EU that the
time is not right to lift the EU Arms Embargo on China. We would
need to see clear progress on the issue that necessitated the
Embargo in the first place, namely civil and political rights.[344]
263. On 25 January 2012, the Chairman of the Committees
wrote to the Foreign Secretary as follows:
The quarterly Arms Export Licence approvals published
by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills for the
first three quarters for 2011 included the following licence approvals
of arms exports to China:
1st January - 31st March 2011
- body armour
- equipment for the production of military communications
equipment
- general military vehicle components
- small arms ammunition (2 licences)
- technology for military communications equipment
- weapon sights
1st April - 30th May
- aircraft military communications equipment (2
licences)
- components for combat aircraft (2 licences)
- components for combat naval vessels
- components for military aero-engines
- components for military patrol/assault craft
- unfinished products for military aero-engines
(2 licences)
1st July - 30th September
- body armour
- technology for military communications equipment
(2 licences)
- cryptographic software
- equipment employing cryptography
- aircraft military communications equipment
- components for combat helicopters
- components for military helicopters
Please would you provide the Committees with an explanation
of why licences were granted for the export of these arms to China
notwithstanding the UK/EU Consolidated Criteria and the Declaration
by the Madrid European Council on 27 June 1989 that established
an arms embargo on China.
The Committees have noted that the UK Government's
interpretation of the embargo, as stated in the quarterly Arms
Export licence approvals, is that the embargo applies to; "lethal
weapons such as machine guns, large calibre weapons, bombs, torpedoes,
rockets and missiles; specially designed components of these item
and ammunition; military aircraft and helicopters, vessels of
war, armoured fighting vehicles and other such weapons platforms;
and any other equipment which might be used for internal repression."[345]
On 6 February 2012 the Foreign Secretary replied
to the Chairman's letter. The Foreign Secretary's reply was as
follows:
Thank you for your letter of 25 January in which
you raise concerns about the Arms Export licence approvals for
China that were published by the Department for Business, Innovation
and Skills for the first three quarters of 2011.
All export licences for China are not only assessed
against the terms of Consolidated Criteria and the EU Arms Embargo,
including the possibility of diversion. Please be assured that
we take the China arms embargo very seriously and are confident
that it was not breached in the cases that you have highlighted.
All export licences for China are not only assessed
against Criteria One of the Consolidated Criteria which covers
our commitment to the EU Arms Embargo, but also taking into account
the remaining Criteria. A full assessment is carried out covering
a number of factors including the nature of the goods, the stated
end-use and end-user, the risk of diversion to an undesirable
end-user, the risk of the proposed export being used for internal
repression, and the regional peace, security and stability.
We receive a large number of licence applications
for China and the majority are for end users in the commercial,
low-cost/mass production, industrial or scientific research and
development fields. Some items are military rated but are not
caught by the EU Arms Embargo, such as military rated items for
non-lethal purposes i.e. industrial components or NBC equipment
for use by environmental agencies.
The UK interpretation of the China Arms Embargo covers:
- lethal weapons such as machine
guns, large calibre weapons, bombs, torpedoes, rockets and missiles
- Specially designed components of the above and
ammunition
- Military aircraft and helicopters, vessels of
war, armoured fighting vehicles and other such weapon platforms
- Any equipment which might be used for internal
repression
Please note components of complete military platforms
such as helicopters and aircraft are not covered by the Embargo.
We have taken each of the general goods descriptions
in your letter and have endeavoured to provide you with further
details that will explain the nature of the goods and therefore
the reasons for approval. These are attached in the Annex to this
letter.
I hope this addresses your concerns.[346]
The unclassified Annex was as follows:
Annex A
Breakdown of Licences Approved for
China
The goods were for use by a global technical textile
manufacturing company with a site in China capable of producing
low cost manufacturing. The armoured vests were sent for testing
at a police facility. After testing they would be damaged to the
point of destruction and sent back to the supplier in the UK for
examination and study. There were no criteria 2 concerns in this
case as there was no clear risk of internal repression.
- Equipment for the production of military
communications equipment
The goods in this case (Multi Socket Connection Box
and Frontier 1600 Cable Test Box) were Equipment Test Units to
be used in the manufacture of cable assemblies which would then
be incorporated into headsets for worldwide distribution by the
exporter in the UK. There were no criteria concerns raised.
- General military vehicle components
The equipment exported under this licence was Lightweight
Crew Seats to a University for research into whether the seats
would be suitable for internal and military security vehicles
but not for "military vehicle projects". There was no
clear risk that the proposed export would be used for internal
repression. The interpretation of the embargo has consistently
been taken to mean that whilst the lethal weapons or whole weapon
platforms may be embargoed non-lethal equipment or components
of weapons platforms are not. Therefore, these seats were not
covered by the embargo.
In the two cases highlighted, the equipment was for
sporting and training purposes and for the sporting purpose of
target shooting.
In both cases, the equipment was supplied by a specialist
manufacturer of sporting ammunition. The ammunition supplied were
sports shooting cartridges, specially designed for training and
sporting purposes. Sports ammunition is not caught under the arms
embargo and as there was no clear risk of diversion, no criteria
2 concerns were raised. The interpretation of the embargo has
consistently been taken to mean that whilst the lethal weapons
or whole weapon platforms may be embargoed non-lethal equipment
or components of weapons platforms are not. This product is not
caught by the UK interpretation of the arms embargo on China.
- Technology for military communications
equipment
In this case, the goods exported were technical drawings
for use in the manufacture (moulding) of parts to be used on cable
assemblies. The end user is a global electronics manufacturing
services (EMS) provider that serves original equipment manufacturers
in technology-related industries such as communications and computer
hardware. Singapore is one of their manufacturing sites.
The moulded parts would be returned to Singapore
who will then integrate them into headsets. These headsets will
be distributed globally by the exporter in compliance with UK
Export Control. This was confirmed by the British manufacturer.
There were no criteria concerns in this case as the
moulds were due to be returned to Singapore.
These goods were telescopic sights originally designed
for target shooting purposes (day time, not night vision). In
this instance the goods were being returned to the original manufacturer
in China as they were faulty. They were being returned for study
and evaluation of defects and subsequent scrapping. The equipment
was therefore deemed exempt from the China arms embargo.
- Aircraft military communications equipment
In one case, the applicant was returning the unaltered
items (antennas) to the manufacturer as they were beyond economic
repair. As such the parts were not expected to be fitted into
any form of aircraft. As the goods were faulty and did not pose
any risks, there were no criteria concerns.
In the other case, the items were analogue aircraft
band transceivers capable of working in Amplitude Modulation on
both the Civilian 108 - 135 MHz Aircraft band and the Military
225 - 400MHz aircraft band. The transmitters were to be used by
the end user for communication during construction and maintenance
of a communications network and an EUU check confirmed they would
not be used for military purposes. Open sources indicated that
the end user is a provider of communication access equipment and
network solutions. As the civil end use was considered legitimate,
there were no criteria concerns raised for this application.
- Components for combat naval vessel /Components
for Military patrol/assault craft
In both cases, the goods in question were propeller
shaft seals and spares that do not fall under the arms embargo.
We will allow non lethal equipment with a military end use to
be exported. These parts were standard components originally
designed for commercial cruise liners 40 years ago and had not
been designed or modified for military use. They would not provide
any enhancement of combat capabilities once fitted onto the vessels.
As the parts have a degree of wear and tear these seals are routinely
inspected and replaced once they have deteriorated.
- Unfinished products for military aero-engines
The products were spare parts for the aero-engine
and Rear end Forgings for an Engine. The components were sent
to China to be machined to a certain specification by the exporter
in the UK and will be used for spares, with eventual incorporation
into the engines by the ultimate end user, the exporter, based
in the UK. .
Despite the classification of military, this equipment
is for industrial purposes only. The UK interpretation of the
embargo has consistently been taken to mean that whilst the lethal
weapons or whole weapon platforms may be embargoed, non-lethal
equipment or components of weapons platforms are not. These products
did not fall under the categories listed above and is therefore
not caught by the arms embargo on China as the current UK interpretation
stands.
- Cryptographic software and equipment employing
cryptography
End users in these cases were consumer services and the products were dual use. Some examples are:
In two cases the equipment would be used for patient monitoring and care in emergency rooms, intensive care and critical care units and incorporated into a wireless application for a portable medical device for use in hospitals.
In some cases the equipment was used for a support system for smartcards based around a banking payment system, whilst other equipment was used to enable secure internet connectivity across communications networks.
|
- Components for combat and Military helicopters
These were for commercial and civilian end use. Some
examples are:
Two disposable filter elements that were exported
for permanent exhibition use in China initially for a Heli Expo
Show, whilst a Fan Assembly Unit exported for scientific research
into the potential use on a commercial airship.
Other goods exported were automatic reservoir bleed
valves used to release entrapped air and/or other gases during
repair and overhaul of components in aircraft.
These valves were parts of a hydraulic system which
the end user would use to release gas after carrying out tests
and are therefore a maintenance tool. The goods were low specification
and would not add to the capabilities of a military aircraft.
The export of such components and any resulting military aircraft
operations is too far removed in cases such as this, so there
were no criteria 4 concerns. [347]
264. The EU's 13th Annual Arms Export
Report was published on 30 December 2011.[348]
Pages 348-351 of the Report detail arms exports to China (Hong
Kong), China (Macao) and China (Mainland) from EU Member States
in 2010 notwithstanding the EU Embargo. The UK Government, according
to the EU Report, in 2010 approved 180 out of the total 199 arms
export licences to China (Hong Kong), 3 out of the total of 18
to China (Macao) and 349 out of the total of 550 to China (Mainland).
On the EU's published statistics the UK Government appears to
have approved more arms export licences to China than any other
EU Member States.
265. The Committees
conclude that given the lack of clear progress on civil and political
rights in China, the Government's support for the EU Arms Embargo
on China to continue is welcome. The Committees recommend that
the Government provides in its Response to this Report an explanation
as to why, according to the EU's latest Report, the UK Government
in 2010 gave a larger number of arms export licence approvals
to China than any other EU Member State notwithstanding the EU
Arms Export Embargo on China.
Extension of the Review to authoritarian
regimes and to countries of concern worldwide
266. The Committees' scrutiny of the Government's
arms export policy review for countries in the Middle East and
North Africa, first announced on 18 February 2011, is set out
in paragraphs 192-208 above.
267. In their last Report (HC686), published on 5
April 2011, the Committees made the following recommendation:
We further recommend that the Government extends
immediately its review of UK arms export licences announced by
the FCO Minister, Mr Alistair Burt, on 18 February 2011 to authoritarian
regimes worldwide in respect of arms or components of arms which
could be used for internal repression.[349]
The Government in its Response (Cm 8079) replied:
The Foreign Secretary has commissioned a review of
Government policy and practice with regard to the export of equipment
that might be used for internal repression, in particular crowd
control goods. Although this review was originally commissioned
in response to events in the Middle East and North Africa, any
conclusions will apply to our procedures for arms exports to all
countries. The FCO is leading this internal review in close consultation
with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)
and the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The Government will be reporting
back on the review to Parliament. This will take place once the
Foreign Secretary has fully considered the findings of the review.[350]
As the Chairman of the Committees pointed out in
the House of Commons debate on the Committees' last Report on
20 October 2011, the Government's statement in its Response that
any conclusions from its review would apply to its procedures
for arms exports to all countries was a different matter from
the Committees' particular recommendation, which was whether the
Government would extend its review to "to authoritarian regimes
worldwide".[351]
268. The Committees returned to their recommendation
in the Oral evidence session with the Foreign Secretary on 7 February
2012. The complete exchange was as follows:
Chair:
Foreign Secretary, we are going to move on to an important recommendation
which we made in our last report, in which we recommended that
you should extend your review of arms export policy to authoritarian
regimes worldwide.
Q134 Chris White: Secretary of
State, extending that, we were just thinking it should not just
be the Middle East and North Africa, it should be to authoritarian
regimes worldwide. Why was this recommendation not implemented?
Mr Hague: Our review covers our
global policycovers the whole thing, whatever the nature
of the regime. Of course, it is events in the Middle East and
North Africa that have given rise to it. But this is a change
to our procedures overall, including authoritarian regimes. As
the Chairman has pointed out, such issues can arise in other countries
as well. So for the purposes of this policy, we are not only concerned
with authoritarian regimes. The change in procedures that I have
announced and that Vince Cable has been talking about, are changes
in procedures globally.
Q135 Chair: Yes, Foreign Secretary,
but that does not answer the particular question that the Committees
have put to you. It is one thing to look at the global application
of the results of your review. We put a different recommendation
to you, that you should extend your review to authoritarian regimes
worldwide. Why did you not accept that recommendation?
Mr Hague: For this reason, Mr
Chairman, this is a worldwide review. It is about our policy towards
all regimes of any kind. If you are saying should we have had
a particular study of authoritarian regimes
Q136 Chair: That was the recommendation
of this Committee. We asked you to extend your review not just
to authoritarian countries in North Africa and the Middle East,
but to authoritarian countries worldwide. That was our recommendation,
and you chose not to accept it.
Mr Hague: Yes, because it was
not confined to the Middle East. If we implement thoroughly, as
we certainly intend to do, the changes in procedures that I talked
about earliermore systematic reporting of human rights
risks, using a wider range of information, more systematic use
of predictive tools and the requirement of end-use monitoring
by overseas postsit will capture what is going on in authoritarian
regimes, as well as the rest of the world. So, of course they
are included; what is going on all over the world is included
in these changes of procedures.
Q137 Chair: The Committees understand
that the outcome of the review is going to be applied globally
by the Government, but the issue that the Committees put to you
was that you should extend your review to authoritarian regimes
worldwideauthoritarian regimes in Africa, in Asia and conceivably
in one or two countries in South Americaand ask yourselves
the same questions that you have posed to yourselves on North
Africa and the Middle East: do all the extant export licences
that we have granted to these authoritarian regimes still comply
with criteria 2 and 3? You have not done that. Why not?
Mr Hague: It is a global review.
I go back to the same answer. Really you are saying that there
should be a bigger change in policy.
Q138 Chair: No, we are saying
that there should have been a bigger change in the geographical
scope of the review that you carried out.
Mr Hague: I am saying that there
is no limit to its geographical scope. Every kind of regime and
every kind of country is captured in this review. Clearly, we
do not have a meeting of minds here, and I have not seen any other
country where we should change our policy and revoke the licences,
because the circumstances have not changed. We focused the review
on practical change, and I have adopted all the recommendations
of the review. I think I see what the Committee is getting at,
but we chose to do it in a different way. I did not agree with
the recommendation of the Committee.[352]
269. In its latest Human Rights Report, Human
Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Report, the FCO has listed a total of 28 countries of human
rights concern. These are: Afghanistan, Belarus, Burma, Chad,
China, Colombia, Cuba, Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK),
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Eritrea, Fiji, Iran, Iraq,
Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Libya, Pakistan,
Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, South Sudan,
Syria, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen and Zimbabwe.
The Committees have set out in Annex 7 examples of export licence
applications approved by the Government from 1 January to 31 December
2011 to these countries of controlled goods that might be used
to facilitate internal repression.
270. The Committees
conclude that the Government's stated policy is to refuse arms
export licences "which might be used to facilitate internal
repression" and not merely to await internal repression becoming
patently clear. The Committees therefore continue to recommend
that the Government extends its arms export policy review from
countries in the Middle East and North Africa to authoritarian
regimes and countries of human rights concern worldwide.
238 CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12, Scrutiny
of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual
Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy and
review of export control legislation, HC686, para 18 Back
239
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, p4 Back
240
The arms export licence revocations in question and the reason
for revocation in each case are detailed in Annex 5. Back
241
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, Department for
International Development, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and
Ministry of Defence, United Kingdom Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2010, HC 1402, p 20 Back
242
HC Deb, 15 December 2011, Cols 123-124 Back
243
Ev 60 Back
244
Ev 59 Back
245
Q 142 Back
246
Q 144 [Chairman of CAEC] Back
247
Q 144 [William Hague] Back
248
"UK 'exporting surveillance technology to brutal regimes':
Fears software is being supplied to repressive governments that
use it to monitor dissidents", The Observer, 8 April
2012
Back
249
EV 164 - Letter from Alistair Burt dated 8 February 2012 Back
250
HC Deb, 9 February 2012, Cols 46-47WS Back
251
HC Deb, 26 October 2000, Cols 199-203W Back
252
FCO Press Notice, "Foreign Office Minister comments on review
of arms exports", http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=News&id=553955182# Back
253
HC Deb, 20 October 2011, Col 244WH Back
254
Q 109 Back
255
FCO Press Notice - http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=News&id=553955182#
Back
256
CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12, Scrutiny of Arms
Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report
2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy and review
of export control legislation, HC686, Annex 4 Back
257
CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12, Scrutiny of Arms
Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report
2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy and review
of export control legislation, HC686, para 135 Back
258
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, pp18-19 Back
259
Ev 63 - Letter from the Chairman to the Foreign Secretary dated
18 July 2011 Back
260
Ev 67 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 30 September 2011 Back
261
Ev 67 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 30 September 2011,
Annex A Back
262
HC Deb, 18 July 2011, Cols 78-79WS Back
263
CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12, Scrutiny of Arms
Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report
2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy and review
of export control legislation, HC686, Annex 4 Back
264
HC Deb, 13 October 2011, Cols 41-42WS Back
265
HC Deb, 20 October 2011, Col 341WH Back
266
HC Deb, 16 April 2012, Col 198W Back
267
Q 110 Back
268
HC Deb, 13 October 2011 col 42WS Back
269
Foreign Affairs Committee, Eighth Report of Session 2011-12, The
FCO's Human Rights Work 2010-12, HC 964, Qq 101-103 Back
270
Ev 42 Back
271
Ev 42 Back
272
Q 12 Back
273
Q 13 Back
274
Q 38 Back
275
Ev 42 Back
276
Q 113 [Sarah MacIntosh] Back
277
Q 113 [David Hall] Back
278
Ev 149 - Letter from the Chairman to the Foreign Secretary dated
21 November 2011 Back
279
Ev 150 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 9 December 2011 Back
280
CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12, Scrutiny of Arms
Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report
2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy and review
of export control legislation, HC686, para 135 Back
281
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, pp21-45 Back
282
Ev 63 - Letter from the Chairman to the Foreign Secretary dated
18 July 2011 Back
283
Ev 67 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 30 September 2011,
Annex A Back
284
Ev 143 - Letter from the Chairman to the Foreign Secretary dated
19 October 2011 Back
285
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, Department for
International Development, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and
Ministry of Defence, United Kingdom Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2010, HC 1402, page 3 Back
286
Annex 11 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 7 January 2012,
Annex A Back
287
Ev 152 - Letter from the Chairman dated 16 January 2012 Back
288
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012
Back
289
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
290
"Popular Protest in North Africa and the Middle East (VIII):
Bahrain's Rocky Road to Reform",International Crisis Group,16
March 2012, www.crisisgroup.org Back
291
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, Annex 1 Back
292
Ev 152 - Letter from the Chairman dated 16 January 2012 Back
293
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012
Back
294
Qq 123-125 and Qq 130-133 Back
295
Ev 178 - Letter and annex from the Foreign Secretary dated 28
February 2012 and Ev 183 - Letter and Annex from the Foreign Secretary
dated 1 May 2012 Back
296
HC Deb, 27 March 2012, Col 1136W Back
297
HC Deb, 27 March 2012, col. 1136W Back
298
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
299
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, Annex 1 Back
300
Ev 152 - Letter from the Chairman dated 16 January 2012 Back
301
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012 Back
302
HC Deb, 27 March 2012, Col 1136W Back
303
HC Deb, 27 March 2012, col. 1136W Back
304
Ev 181 - Letter from Alistair Burt dated 26 April 2012 Back
305
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
306
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, Annex 1 Back
307
Ev 152 - Letter from the Chairman dated 16 January 2012 Back
308
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012 Back
309
HC Deb, 27 Mar 2012, cols 1136-37W Back
310
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
311
CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12, Scrutiny of Arms
Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report
2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy and review
of export control legislation, HC686, Annex 4 Back
312
Ev 63 - Letter from the Chairman to the Foreign Secretary dated
18 July 2011 Back
313
Ev 67 - letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 30 September 2011,
Back
314
HC Deb, 20 October 2011, col 343WH Back
315
Ev 152 - Letter from the Chairman dated 16 January 2012 Back
316
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012 Back
317
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
318
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, Annex 1 Back
319
Ev 67 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 30 September 2011,
Table 1 Back
320
Ev 152 - Letter from the Chairman dated 16 January 2012 Back
321
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012 Back
322
HC Deb, 27 Mar 2012, col 1137W Back
323
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
324
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, Annex 1 Back
325
Ev 152 - Letter from the Chairman dated 16 January 2012 Back
326
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012 Back
327
HC Deb, 27 Mar 2012, cols 1137-39W Back
328
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
329
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, Annex 1 Back
330
Ev 152 - Letter from the Chairman dated 16 January 2012 Back
331
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012 Back
332
Qq 123-125 and Qq 130-133 Back
333
Ev 178 - Letter and annex from the Foreign Secretary dated 28
February 2012and Ev 183 - Letter and Annex from the Foreign Secretary
dated 1 May 2012 Back
334
HC Deb, 27 Mar 2012, cols 1139-40W Back
335
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
336
Ev 181 - letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 26 April 2012 Back
337
HC Deb, 26 April 2012, Col 43WS Back
338
FCO, Human Rights and Democracy: The 2011 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office Report, Cm 8339, April 2012 Back
339
EU Declaration on China Arms Embargo - European Council: Madrid
26-27 June 1989 Back
340
CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2009-10, Scrutiny of Arms
Export Controls (2010): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report
2008, Quarterly reports for 2009, licensing policy and review
of export control legislation, HC 202, paras 114-119 Back
341
European Council, 16-17 December 2004, Presidency Conclusions Back
342
"The EU and arms for China", The Economist, 1
February 2010 Back
343
CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12, Scrutiny of Arms
Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report
2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy and review
of export control legislation, HC686, para 120 Back
344
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, p 16 Back
345
Ev 154 - Letter from the Chairman to the Foreign Secretary dated
25 January 2012 Back
346
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012 Back
347
Ev 156 - Letter from the Foreign Secretary dated 6 February 2012
Back
348
Official Journal of the European Union, Thirteenth Annual Report
according to Article 8(2) of Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP
defining common rules governing control of exports of military
technology and equipment, 30 December 2011 Back
349
CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12, Scrutiny of Arms
Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls Annual Report
2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy and review
of export control legislation, HC686, para 135 Back
350
Government response to CAEC, First Joint Report of Session 2010-12,
Scrutiny of Arms Export Controls (2011): UK Strategic Export Controls
Annual Report 2009, Quarterly reports for 2010, licensing policy
and review of export control legislation, Cm 8079, Pp 19-20 Back
351
HC Deb, 20 October 2011, Col 343WH Back
352
Qq 134-138 Back
|