Europe, Headlines, Human Rights

POLITICS: Arms Slipping Through EU Loopholes

Stefania Bianchi

BRUSSELS, Sep 30 2004 (IPS) - Loopholes in EU arms controls are allowing weapons exports to countries that abuse human rights, a coalition of independent groups says.

“There are major loopholes in the EU code of conduct on arms exports, which must be strengthened without delay,” says a report by a group of 55 European non-governmental organisations (NGOs) led by Oxfam, Amnesty International and Saferworld.

The 53-page report ‘Taking Control: The Case for a More Effective EU Code of Conduct’ released Thursday (Sep. 30) says European Union (EU) military exports have reached undemocratic countries such as Burma, China and Nepal.

Between 1994 and 2001 the EU exported nearly 10 billion dollars (8.1 billion euros) of arms to developing countries, the study claims. This represents about a third of all arms deliveries to these countries.

The EU code of conduct on arms exports was adopted in June 1998. It recommends criteria for granting arms export licences but is not legally binding. The NGOs are pushing for a legally binding treaty but say strengthening the EU code would represent a “major step” towards this goal.

The report cites several instances of military exports to undemocratic regimes. It says diesel engines made by the German firm Deutz AG were fitted into armoured personnel carriers in China despite restrictions on military sales to China following a crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in Beijing in 1989. Hundreds were killed in the massacre.

The French firm Eurocopter is reported to have worked “in close cooperation” with Indian manufactures to produce attack helicopters which were then exported to Nepal. This was despite use of helicopters against civilians and insurgents by Nepalese security forces, the report says. The Austrian weapons firm Steyr-Mannlincher has signed a manufacturing agreement with the Malaysian government, the report says. Malaysia which is not subject to the EU code says it will export Steyr’s AUGA3 rifle to some 40 countries.

The EU indicated last week that it will lift an arms embargo on Libya after pressure from Italy, which said Libya needs better equipment to tackle illegal migrants. The EU is also considering lifting the ban on weapons sales to China.

Many European leaders say China’s human rights situation has improved significantly since 1989 and that the embargo is no longer justified. French President Jacques Chirac has led the calls for resumption of arms sales to China.

The NGO report says the EU code has had a “substantial impact” on arms exports but contains many weaknesses and needs to be changed.

“The EU code is a first step, but clearly it is not meeting its objective of ensuring responsible export controls across Europe,” said Dick Oosting, director of Amnesty International’s EU Office. “EU states are still supplying arms to countries that abuse human rights and suffer internal instability.”

Henry Smith from Saferworld said many EU member states are exporting defence equipment when they should not. “This report sets out what needs to happen to prevent these abuses,” he said.

The Dutch presidency of the EU is currently leading a review of the EU code and is expected to present its findings before the end of its term in office in December.

But the NGOs warn in their report that there does not appear to be “the political will to implement the changes needed to make a difference.” The report says “tighter language” and “enhanced transparency” would help prevent “irresponsible export licensing decisions.”

Roy Isbister from Saferworld says moves to oppose weapons exports run into financial, economic and political arguments.

“The EU presents a number of arguments based on employment, economies of scale and national income,” he told IPS. “They say that the export of arms is good for a country’s economy. There is also the argument that the export of arms is a good way of wielding influence over another country’s foreign policy.” Countries also feel “national pride” in manufacturing and exporting arms. But many of these arguments are no longer valid, he says.

“It is currently a buyers’ market for arms and not a sellers’ market, so this means that the country buying weapons can exert power on the country selling them, and not the other way around,” he said.

Oosting says a part of the problem is the voting structure within the EU. “While a number of member states are sympathetic to our call to make the code legally binding, others are not. Because of the voting system in the European Council there will never be a consensus on this,” he told IPS.

Justin Forsyth, director of policy at Oxfam, said the EU code of conduct has “failed to stop arms from going where they shouldn’t be allowed. This new research illustrates the urgent need for the EU to control its arms trade in a responsible manner. Every year we see hundreds of thousands of people killed by arms. Europe should be a model for the rest of the world to follow."