 |
By Joe Zarro
North Korea has the potential to turn South Korea into a "sea of flames" at any minute, India and Pakistan have exchanged nuclear threats in a rivalry over Kashmir and war is so rampant in Africa there are reports
of soldiers in the Congo resorting to cannibalism. Even though the world has its ups, it certainly has a laundry list of downs that have many fearing an Armageddon. Dodging what feels like a grim destiny seems impossible, but after eliminating reckless U.S. arms exports, the metal for a peace monument suddenly becomes more malleable.
Human nature is a simple beast - it charges toward profit. If we want to change the direction of our world, all we need to do is move the money. If the United States is allowed to provide arms to other countries according to economic interests, and not as rewards to allies maintaining diplomacy, you create a climate for war. The sale of arms itself is an economic interest and makes almost any war, in any location, lucrative.
According to Demilitarization for Democracy - a Washington research group - the United States exported $21.3 billion of arms in 1997. Fifty-two of the countries which received a combined $8.3 billion worth of arms that year do not democratically elect their leaders. The People reports that between 1993 and 1997, the United States sold, approved or gave away a combined $190 billion worth of arms to nearly every nation on Earth. These nations included countries with poor human rights records, such as Turkey, Columbia and Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, there have been several instances in which the United States supplied arms to both sides of a conflict. Both Iran and Iraq received U.S. arms support during the Iran/Iraq war, and Greece and Turkey both used U.S. military technology during Turkey's 1974 invasion of Cyprus.
Funding dictatorships and playing both sides of a conflict is not a lucid foreign policy - it's a fiscal policy. For more than a decade since the end of the Cold War, the United States has continued to throw its weight and wealth around the world.
Recently, the excuse for negligent arms deals has shifted from the Cold War to the war on terror, which has already set a precedent for the next era of military action. Since Sept. 11, 2001, the United States has lifted economic sanctions against Pakistan put in place as punishment for testing nuclear weapons and a military coup that replaced the elected leader. According to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, since sanctions were lifted, the United States has contributed millions in aid by providing helicopters, fixed-wing aircraft, night-vision goggles and appropriate training. Pakistan has also been requesting more ambitious military hardware, such as multiple F-16 aircraft and rocket launching systems (along with anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles).
Pakistan is a clear example of the unchanged attitude of the United States. Pakistan is governed by an armed coup, aggressively building its military arsenal (including weapons of mass destruction), engaged in a heated rivalry and even accused of funding terrorism against India, yet we form an alliance out of private U.S. ambitions and not in the interest of global peace and diplomacy.
However, heedless weapons transactions are not simply the fault of the United States. Russia is often a close second in military sales and, according to BBC News, Russia was the chief exporter of arms in 2001, heavily supplying countries such as India and China.
Efforts have been made to encourage accountability, such as the 2000 E.U. and U.S. Declaration of Responsibility in Arms Exports which addresses issues such as weapons being used in international terrorism and other violations of human rights. But recent U.S. exports and a heavily increased military budget clearly indicate that current arm export guidelines are not effectively encouraging non-proliferation and demilitarization.
The global public must force U.S. and Russian exporters to adhere to strict restrictions on the extent to which arms can be sold. Regulating the arms industry is the first of several steps to remove the economic benefits of war. As long as there are huge profits in war, there will be a powerful group of people who feed off conflict - and our lives are in their hands.
Joe Zarro is an English junior and opinion editor for The Daily Aztec.
The Daily Aztec
March 13, 2003
Arms Exports Need to be Regulated to Create Lasting Peace
|
|
|
