Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Arms Trade: Profits Before Human Rights?
According to an Amnesty International report, the US, Russia and a number of European countries supplied large quantities of weapons to repressive governments in the Middle East and North Africa before this year's uprisings.
Egypt’s activists held up tear gas canisters labeled, “Made in the USA.” The report says that these arms deals were signed despite evidence of a substantial risk that they could be used to commit serious human rights violations.
The human rights group reports that in the five years preceding the Arab spring $2.4bn worth of small arms, tear gas, armored vehicles and other security equipment was sold to five specified countries that have faced or are facing popular uprisings - Bahrain, Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen.
And these sales were committed by at least 20 governments including Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, the UK and the US.
The Amnesty International report also says that existing arms export controls have failed to prevent the transfer of arms.
It finds that US is the biggest arms supplier to Egypt that provides the Egyptian government with both military and law enforcement equipment that is worth $1.3bn.
And it identifies the 10 states whose governments licensed the supply of weaponry, ammunition and related equipment to Libya since 2005 - these include Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, Spain and the UK.
It says India authorized the supply of armored vehicles to Syria while France sold ammunitions between 2005 and 2009 and Russia is also a main supplier to Syria.
The report expressly written with a pending international arms trade treaty in view - UN members voted on forming an arms trade treaty by an overwhelming majority of 153 countries in favor and only one country against it on October 30, 2009.
The goal of this treaty is to regulate the global arms market in order to prevent weapons reaching the hands of those who would use them to undermine stability, harm development and abuse human rights. The member states of UN will meet again in July to negotiate this treaty.
Does business come before humanitarian principles? And can the arms trade really be controlled by an international treaty?
Inside Story, with presenter Mike Hanna, discusses with guests Alexandre Vautravers, a professor of International Relations at Webster University, Geneva and editor of the Swiss Military Review; Gamal Abdel Gawad, a professor of Political Science at the American University in Cairo and a consultant to the Al-Ahram Center; and Helen Hughes, Amnesty International's Principle arms trade researcher.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
13 Comments so far
Show All"Human rights" have never had anything to do with the arms trade. Sometimes the phrase is used as part of an excuse to arm one faction or another, but mostly it's just business. Someone once posted a nice list of all the wars where U.S. arms manufacturers were selling to both sides or to people we were professing were our avowed enemies. Friendly fire.
Unfortunately, arms are like money; the few with too many control the many with too few.
The leaders of the new world order seem to be obsessed with murder. How destructive can we make it, can we make it more savage and painful, can we make it kill long after the original strike has been made? Let's spread democracy, we will sell arms to both sides before the conflict, then watch them kill each other. Leaving tons of depleted uranium to kill for millions of years to come. Where is the environmentental outrage for this essentially permanent destruction of soil and water. Once again,,the 1% .is getting its kicks and thrills from robbing poor countries of thier resources, then blowing thier assessing up.
The evils of Capitalism. Should the only nation to have ever used nuclear weapons to kill, be disarmed and forever kept from having any weapons? The USA should be limited to cap pistols and tiny sling shots. History is evidence that they cannot be trusted with any other type weapon systems.
Why does the title of this article end in a question mark?
This incredibly disingenuous article from Al Jazeera is outrageous!
(The following is from The Free Dictionary by Farex)
dis·in·gen·u·ous (dsn-jny-s)
adj.
1. Not straightforward or candid; insincere or calculating: "an ambitious, disingenuous, philistine, and hypocritical operator, who ... exemplified ... the most disagreeable traits of his time" (David Cannadine).
2. Pretending to be unaware or unsophisticated; faux-naïf.
3. Usage Problem Unaware or uninformed; naive.
"Does business come before humanitarian principles? And can the arms trade really be controlled by an international treaty?"
Doesn't Al Jazeera know the answer to these elementary facts of life? Or has the establishment acceptance of this news service, notably by Secretary of State Clinton, blunted the critical comments on current affairs that were once the hallmark of Al Jazeera?
Profits Before Human Rights? is not simply a function of the Arms Trade:. The "Arms Trade" is a "profit-center" of Capitalism.
The very essence of Capitalism to always to favor "Property Rights over Human Rights".
The only way to end the arms trade, to enforce international treaties, is to remove arms manufacture from private corporate ownership and control.
Capitalism intrinsically creates major economic, political, ecological and social crises in the normal functioning of a capitalist economy. Capitalism exists solely to maximize the profits of the corporations and the wealth of the individuals (the top 1%) who own them.
Human survival requires a transition from a capitalist economy, that
profits a tiny minority, towards an economy that is organized to meet the economic needs of the 99% majority of the people.
The U.S. economy is forever being looted to maximize the profit of the
capitalist class (top 1%) at the expense of everyone else.
Read further:
Monthly Review Magazine.
World Socialist Web Site: http://www.wsws.org
In California, register Peace and Freedom Party.
" The only way to end the arms trade is to remove arms manufacture from private corporate ownership and control".
Jerry: How do you propose we can do that short of a revolution? Close down the war profiteers like Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon among many other giant defense corporations and contracters like XE, seems almost impossible.
You got me thinkin, I wonder if they thought they could make a bigger killing on rebuilding and Peace.
Otherwise we will only be an obstacle to the war machine and we know what that means.
Singing Masters of War hasn't stopped them, so we gotta try more.
Maybe the War Machine needs to be converted.
It will take the people owning the central banks for the common good too.
And how we get money out of the system and more people voting instead of the voter suppression that is going on for older and poorer folks that's a crime.
So the revolution it seems is gonna be a long hard struggle, if we don't back down....
and the shits if we do.
It is all a great mystery and we are lucky to be alive.
silly question.
Sadly enough, I'm tired of being like a cotton-boll in the South, "looking for the lesser of two weevils."
So far my next ballot is just going to be write-ins. "None of the above."
The arms trade is itself a crime against humanity. All manufacturers and dealers in weapons ised to kill humans should be tried for crimes against humanity. The title of this article is itself a joke. It asks a question to which I reply "Duh!"
The "Arms Trade" is the "profit-center" of Capitalism and the US is the perpetrator.