Those who have died in war since 09 August 1945 have, for the most part, been killed by cheap, mass-produced weapons and small-calibre ammunition, costing little more than the transistor radios and dry-cell batteries which have flooded the world in the same period. Because cheap weapons have disrupted life very little in the advanced world, outside the restricted localities where drug-dealing and political terrorism flourish, the populations of the rich states have been slow to recognise the horror that this pollution has brought in its train. Little by little, though, recognition of the horror is gaining ground.
-John Keegan, A History of Warfare1
?
The world community must take a closer look at the proliferation of small arms and minor weapons. The factor of the inordinate weaponisation of societies/regions can only be ignored at great peril to peace, tranquillity and sustained development in widespread regions of the world. The countries/forces which fuel the proliferation of small arms and minor weapons do it for many complex reasons, from individual motives to economic reasons or national interests. The result of this proliferation may be insurgent movements, separatist wars, ethnic, religious or political conflicts but the brunt is borne by the innocents of society, the non-combatant people in this regions.
?
The world witnessed a steady rise in conflict from 1945 to 1992. According to the Wars, Armaments, and Development Research Unit at the University of Hamburg, the number peaked at 51 in 1992 and declined to 37 in 1995.2 In the past eight years there have been more than 100 cases of armed conflict, almost all within states (the most notable exceptions being Iraq-Kuwait and, most recently, Eritrea-Ethiopia) and involving more than 175 subnational groups and organisations.3 All of the 31 major conflicts in 1994 were intra-state, and most were fought with weapons that come under the somewhat misleading category called 'small arms'. These intra-state wars may be between armed groups or factions (Somalia, Afghanistan, Liberia, etc.) or between the government on one side and various groups on the other (Chechnya, Turkey, India, etc.) The government in these cases uses a considerable part of its conventional arsenals to operate against the militants/guerrillas/fighters/mercenaries who are challenging the state authority.
?
In the last 50 plus years, the international community has ignored the ramifications of the small arms trade, refusing to restrict this trade or ban its production. However, due to the global upsurge in ethnic and sectarian violence, the international community has finally woken up to the evils of this trade. In January 1995, the last Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali stated that, "I wish to concentrate on what might be called 'micro-disarmament', I mean practical disarmament in the context of the conflicts the UN is actually dealing with, and of the weapons, most of them light weapons, that are actually killing people in the hundreds of thousands" (emphasis added).4 This focus on the conflicts, The UN is 'actually dealing with' represents a major shift in global priorities.
?
Most of today's wars are fought with small arms that include pistols, automatic rifles, sub-machine guns, mortars, grenades, shoulder/vehicle mounted light missiles, and land mines. In modern armed conflicts, over 80 per cent of casualties are now civilians. And a point to emphasis is that 90 per cent of civilian casualties are caused by small arms.5 In this interaction, I will refer to this type of conflict as 'contemporary conflict' and will try to explain what it involves. None of these contemporary conflicts follow any rules or norms of traditional war fighting that are a part of military thought and doctrine. The use of 'small arms' in these 'contemporary conflicts' does not in any way mean that the costs, scope or destruction are at all small. The destruction in Bosnia caused by the 'mortar war' and snipers was seen by all on television. While the existing condition of Afghanistan is the direct result of more than US$ 6 billion worth of 'weapons aid' (mostly in the form of small weapons) that was sent into the country by a superpower and sympathetic allies through a conduit third country. The effect of proliferation of small arms in the conduit country is also a case study in itself. In these contemporary conflicts, most of the casualties are civilian, ordinary bystanders in someone else's strategic plan. For every one person directly hit, over 20 persons are displaced. The war in Afghanistan alone is responsible for a refugee population of around 4.5 million, which was a fourth of the 18.9 million people under UN care in 1992. At the end of 1997 there were more than 22 million refugees and displaced people. (This figure does not include movement of emigrants seeking to escape poor and deteriorating economic conditions).6
?
I will make an attempt to analyse the impact of the proliferation of small arms and minor weapons in the poor and developing regions of the world, with special reference to South Asia, and to address the countermeasures the world community must take to tackle this lucrative but destructive trade.
?
Small Arms/Small Weapons
The weapons that cause maximum casualties are the 'small arms' which most armies and NATO in particular defines as "crew portable direct fire weapons of a calibre less than 50 mm" with a secondary capability to defeat light armour and helicopters. In simple terms, they are weapons that can be carried by a combatant or by a light vehicle. This category includes pistols, rifles, hand grenades, machine guns, light mortars, shoulder-fired anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles, and antipersonnel mines.
?
There are many reasons why small arms, mines, and light weapons figure so prominently in contemporary conflicts. The insurgents, ethnic separatists, brigands, and warlords have modest resources and limited access to the international arms market. They obtain weapons from the international black market or through theft from government arsenals, but they can rarely afford or gain access to major weapon systems. Further they do not have access to logistical support to maintain major weapons systems. The character of present day conflict is ethnic and sectarian warfare that further reinforces the use of small weapons. The objective of war between states is the defeat and destruction of the adversary's military forces; the goal of ethnic warfare is the slaughter or the intimidation of members of another group and their forced abandonment of homes and villages (ethnic cleansing).
?
The requirement of weapons for these contemporary conflicts are that they should: not require much training to use, inflict as many casualties as possible, be light to carry and small to hide. Therefore the most popular weapon is the assault rifle in the AK series which was originally manufactured in Russia. It is now produced by various East and Central European countries with 20 million copies in existence (a conservative estimate) in around 55 states.7 Another estimate is that there are more than 70 million Kalashnikovs (AK is also known by its inventor's name, Kalashnikov) produced in some 100 different versions since 1947. Most of these are still in use by the armies in 78 countries and countless guerrilla groups the world over.8 With a rate of fire of 600 rounds per minute the AK-47 registered a high rate of customer satisfaction. Most of the ongoing contemporary conflicts are being fought with the AK series, especially the newer version the AK-74.
?
However, there exist whole range of weapons being used from Myanmar to Sierre Lione to Kosovo that involve very many types. Among them are the US made M-16, of which 8 million copies have been turned out, the German G-3 (7 million), the Belgian-designed FN-FAL (5 to 6 million), and the Israeli Uzi machine pistol (10 million). In addition to licensed production of these and other small weapons, several countries are apparently flooding the world market with counterfeit (unauthorised) versions. All in all, more than 100 million military-style rifles are thought to exist world-wide.9
?
All major industrial powers manufacture small arms of various types, and tend to rely on domestic production for their basic military needs and sell their surpluses to other states. Another group of countries, including some in the developing world, has undertaken the licensed manufacture of small arms originally developed by the major arms producing states. The major producers of arms are Russia, China, several European nations, and US.
?
The United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNDIR) based at Geneva in 1994 has identified 300 companies in 52 countries manufacturing small arms and anti-tank weapons. This represents a 25 percent increase in the known number of manufacturing countries as compared since mid-1980s. Licensed production is taking place in at least 22 developing countries, 16 of which are exporting these kinds of weapons.10 A point worth noting is that these weapons are of low technology, and can, and are, being replicated by 'cottage industry' and anti-government groups in several nations. Second these weapons can be improvised for use as per requirement, like in Bosnia where aircraft missiles were used in ground to ground mode in improvised launchers.
?
The technology is easy to adapt, and profits are immense, hence the growth of companies world-wide and even states entering the arms trade. China possesses the world's largest industrial capacity for producing light weapons, with about 16 factories. The size of the global trade is difficult to evaluate as governments and companies are reluctant to part with information. Many governments are hardly bothered where a few thousand old rifles or machine guns go. Estimates of this global trade vary from US$ 2 billion for a year to around US$ 10 billion.11 To give an insight of this accounting problem, US is an example. Michael Klare estimates that of US$ 25.9 billion worth of arms that US firms were authorised to export in 1989-93, small arms accounted for perhaps a third - US$ 8.6 billion worth. He reckons that anywhere from 10 to 20 per cent of US grant transfers of arms and ammunition (worth US$ 55.2 billion in 1950-94) involved small arms.12
?
The Nature of Contemporary Conflicts
1. Contemporary conflicts cause immense casualties in terms of human life, human development, and economic growth, breakdown of law and order, environmental degradation and ultimately erosion of the basis of a state. This can be seen in examples such as Afghanistan, Somalia and Liberia, to name but a few.
?
2. The arms are supplied by neighbouring or interested states for different intentions. In certain countries the aim is to create instability (India and Pakistan), to divide a country (former Yugoslavia), or to create a zone of influence (Georgia, Nagorno-Karabakh, the Taleban movement).
?
3. Many are the result of over arming a society or a particular faction during the cold war years, and the subsequent withdrawal of support for the government by the superpower patron (e.g. Somalia).
?
4. International weapon dealers or black market profiteers have no morals about supplying weapons. To them profit is the main issue.
?
5. In these contemporary conflicts the battle is marked by armed violence, targeting both cities and population. It is seen that 90% of the casualties are non- participating civilians. Recently, the trend has changed to also include controlling food supplies and humanitarian assistance by various factions (Somalia, Rwanda, and Bosnia).
?
6. Contemporary conflicts lead to instability in the country as the arms trade and its influx criminalises the movement. Drugs are being used more and more to buy weapons from the international black market, and subsequently control of the lucrative drug trade control becomes the agenda (Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Burma).
?
7. Even when the conflict ends or intensity reduces, a new terror is unleashed in the form of organised crime.
?
Sources of Small Arms
The proliferation of small arms and weapons in developing countries or the poorer regions of the world is due to:
?
?
1. Sources of existing stocks of weapons. The existing stocks of weapons in certain regions are due to cold war rivalry between the superpowers. These poor regions of the world were their battlefields to compete with one another. To illustrate this, Angola received weapons 'aid' from the Soviet Union, Cuba and China, while its opposition groups received aid from the US, South Africa had received some US$ 250 million in light and medium weapons.13 Somalia received weapon aid from both superpowers; through with the changeover of Soviet aid to Ethiopia it turned to the US. Between 1980-89, the US sold Somalia US$ 35 million worth of weapons including 5000 M16A1 rifles, 4000 grenades, nearly 500 TOW missiles and landmines.14 All this was done by the US in return for the strategic facilities at Berbera with its deep-water harbour, and a 15,000-foot airstrip on the Gulf of Aden. Afghanistan tops the list for receiving weapon aid amounting to over US$ 6 billion. The purpose was to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan in retaliation for their role in Vietnam, and also to serve US strategic interests. A point to note is that the supplier of weapons to the communist regime of Afghanistan earlier was the US.
Michael Brzoska and Herbert Wolf of the Bonn International Centre for Conversion (BICC) in Germany point out that "what is surplus for a modern army is still useful for enemies who armed with outdated weapons." Indeed, some of the weapons transferred as far back as 40 years ago by the US military are still in use today by the armed forces of countries in Latin America, Asia, and Africa.15 Researchers at BICC reckon that the current cumulative inventory of surplus major weapons systems world-wide runs to about 165,000 pieces- tanks, artillery, jet fighters, large naval ships- or about one out of three in the existing arsenals. Between 1990 and 1995, more than 18,000 of these were transferred, involving 41 exporting countries and 90 importers.16
?
2. Proliferation due to Disarmament. Change in military doctrine and the end of the cold war has released weapons in tons all over the world. The former Soviet Union has emerged as the most uncontrolled source of weapons. The Korzhakov report investigation the State Trading Corporation, Rosvooruzheniye, reported 'uncontracted sales' of around US$ 5 billion.17 The unification of Germany released nearly 295,000 tons of weapons, a million pistols, 4,500 tons of rocket propellant and 26,346 rocket propelled grenades among other heavier weapons of the former East German Army.18 Out of this Turkey received 304,000 formerly East German Kalashnikovs and 83 million rounds of ammunition from Germany.19 Reports state that Saudi Arabia may have bought arms worth US$ 3.9 billion from Ukraine, Russia and Bulgaria and diverted them to Southern Yemen, setting in motion the civil war.20 Ukrainian shipments have been intercepted in the Azores, carrying not medicines as per documents but weapons possibly intended for Peru.21 Other sources of weapons that exist are the regular armed forces of Russia, Thailand and South Africa.
?
3. The international Black-market Weapon markets exist close to conflict zones. The arms market of Bangkok functioned on the weapons released by the Vietnamese and Cambodian conflicts. This has turned into a convenient market for south Asia's insurgent groups and the drug lords of the golden triangle (Myanmar). Pakistan has around 4 major arms markets in Jamrud and Dara. The weapons available here are of Soviet and East European origin, leftovers of the Afghanistan legacy. Osh in Kyrgyzstan is also emerging as a focal point for drugs and weapons. Nanking in China, once a staging post for weapons into Vietnam is now a thriving drug and arms market. Cox's Bazaar in Bangladesh is also emerging as a new focal point for drugs and arms markets.
?
4. Local (illegal) production. The LTTE (Sri Lanka) produce their own IED's (Improvised Explosive Devices) and mortars, and even made a try for micro light aircraft. Groups in the Philippines are reported to produce their own rocket launchers. The IRA has successfully operated home-made mortars and launched for many years with great success (not least hitting the garden of 10 Downing Street in January 1991). Ammunition is being manufactured for various types of guns in nearby regions of the arms markets. However, this industry is still at a very elementary stage.
?
5. Clandestine weapon suppliers or the grey market. The grey market is the arena of the international arms dealer. He is out of reach of the normal militants/insurgents/factions. He functions with the tacit acquiescence of government and is often a conduit for government policy, as the Iran-Contra scandal has disclosed. This involves a tremendous network of contacts at money laundering outlets, embassies, customs, security services, etc. The number of private dealers seems to be on the increase, as indicated by the growing number of shipments being intercepted, but it shows the trade is extremely profitable with low accountability.
?
6. Drugs, guns and intelligence agencies. The precedent of intelligence agencies using the profits from drugs to finance a covert operation already exists. On the other hand the drug traffickers, requiring an well-armed militia to run their drug operations, are now an important part of the illegal arms trade cartel. There is a growing tendency among the military from certain states like Thailand and Pakistan to involve themselves in this lucrative arms market.
?
Proliferation of Small Arms and Minor Weapons
The regions that have been affected by the proliferation of weapons are Africa (Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Rwanda, Liberia), Central America (Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala), South Asia (Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka), and Bosnia and Cambodia, to name but a few. In this chapter, the South Asia region is being discussed.
?
Afghanistan
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 unleashed the violence and destruction that is to date continuing, even though the Soviets withdrew in 1989. The tragedy of Afghanistan was the power play between the outside power at its worst. For the West, the invasion was an extension of the Brezhnev doctrine. The Carter regime in the US was of the opinion that the Soviets had shifted their strategy to expansionism and the move towards Afghanistan endangered the sea lanes in the Indian Ocean and thus the flow of oil. The Carter doctrine enunciated in January 1980 stated that "any threat against the Persian gulf would be considered a threat against the vital interests of the US and would be resisted, if necessary, by the use of military force".22 In order to oust the Soviets, covert US military support was sanctioned, routed through Pakistan to the Mujahideen fighters.
?
The weapons of the Mujahideen improved from 1984 due to US support. The weapons supplied were either of Soviet design or manufacture, following the CIA philosophy of "plausible deniability" so that covert aid could not be linked with the US. The US$ 6 billion aid package came through the US and Saudi alliance alone. The arms of Soviet design were purchased from China but a certain percentage was provided as aid also. Additional arms came in from Egypt (stocks of Soviet weapons from earlier days), South Africa (captured in Angola and Mozambique) and Israel (captured from the PLO).23
?
The problems of this supply were that it was nearly unlimited, of various types, and the CIA had no way of accounting for it or controlling the distribution process. The effect of this colossal arms aid is that South Asia is still paying the price. Though the Soviets withdrew in 1989, peace has yet to arrive in Afghanistan. This is because the old Mujahideen leaders have the arsenals to equip private armies and this is what they have done. Secondly, these leaders have a side business, the drug trade. To date in Afghanistan more than 500,000 people have lost their lives. Ten million anti-personnel mines were laid by Soviet troops during the operation and covered 13 million square metres of land ranging from rural areas to urban thoroughfares. Afghanistan is in civil war and the arms are being used for settling personal and political scores. There are about 5 million refugees due to this conflict. Pakistan, the beneficiary of yesteryear, is paying to feed them. Arms are in abundance in Pakistan and the drug problem has struck that society.
?
The US is also affected; it is trying to buy back at ten times the price 560 stinger missiles, which it supplied, as they pose a danger to US civil aircraft.
?
Pakistan
Inordinate weaponisation due to the Afghanistan era has hit many urban centres. Criminal gangs and the drug industry are armed with Kalashnikov rifles. There are nearly 3 million drug users in a population of 110 million. The country is seeing armed violence and social unrest.
?
The international illegal arms market is thriving in Pakistan. In Quetta, in a single haul, the authorities seized 10,000 anti-tank shells, a million rounds of 7.62 mm ammunition, 250 grenades, 200 mortar shells and several thousand fuses and explosives.24 Due to proliferation of arms Pakistan has become a international drug and arms market.
India
India has seen a rapid growth in terrorist and insurgency movements since 1982-83, which corresponds to the date of the influx of arms into South Asia and the availability of arms on the international black-market in South Asia and South East Asia.
?
The way in which sophisticated weapons can alter the violence radically is best illustrated in the Golden Temple intervention against the Punjab militancy movement by the Indian Army. This battle raged within the confines of 200 square metre premises. It lasted for a total period of 18 hours, (from 5 p.m. on June 5, to 11 a.m. on June 6, 1984), claimed extremely high casualties.25 Indian Army casualties were 83 killed, 248 wounded, and the terrorist's casualties were 492 killed and 86 wounded. The weapons captured were: 7.62 mm light machine guns 41, 7.62 mm self loading rifles 84, 7.62 mm Chinese rifles 52, assorted rifles 28, .303 rifles 399, carbines 41, sub-machine guns 49, pistols 84, pistols (country made) 67, 12 bore guns 78, rocket propelled grenade launchers 2; a total of 927 weapons. The period between 1986 to 1993 accounted for a large number of deaths and more than half of these were unarmed, innocent civilians massacred by terrorist groups. Deaths due to explosives and bombing devices ran into hundreds. All this was the result of the arms influx into Pakistan and Afghanistan. Training was given to Sikh militants along with the Afghan freedom fighters by Pakistan's ISI and arms were smuggled across the border. India had to marshal substantial resources to combat the insurgency and curb further the influx of small arms on the north-western border, "(It) had to construct a 433-kilometre long security fence in Punjab and another 214 kilometres in the Rajasthan sector of the India-Pakistan border, to constrict the flow of weapons and infiltrators. The security fencing cost Indian Rupees 1,890 million to erect."26 The situation in Punjab has been repaired but Chris Smith warns, "should militancy re-emerges, there is probably enough weaponry in the region to facilitate a new campaign" and also, "arms are now widely dispersed amongst the populace."27
?
In Jammu and Kashmir, the insurgency movement took an upturn in 1988. In that there was a sudden escalation of violence, this can be related to the influx of arms in the region (South Asia, namely Pakistan and Afghanistan). The weapons seen and captured in Kashmir were identical to those provided by the ISI (Inter-services Intelligence of Pakistan) to the Afghan Mujahideen.28 In this state of India more than 20,000 people have been killed in violence since 1988.
?
The north-east of India, where insurgency has always existed since the 1950s, saw a sudden upsurge in violence from 1992 to 1996. This was due to insurgents/militants in South Asia sharing their expertise in weapons and explosives. Another reason was the new nexus of drugs and insurgency due to its proximity to the 'golden triangle'. The route of drugs from the golden triangle runs from north-east India through Pakistan and Afghanistan into Europe by various routes.
?
The level of terrorist violence had soared due to arms and explosives being available. This was seen when a professionally managed bombing operation in Bombay in March 1993, took over 200 lives within two hours through 13 simultaneous explosive blasts at spread locations in the city.
?
Sri Lanka
The insurgency in Sri Lanka erupted in 1983, and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam (LTTE) have emerged as one of the most organised and strong insurgent group in the workd. The cadres of LTTE have matured into a 9,000 strong fighting machine of which nearly 2,000 are women. The LTTE in known to acquire arms from outlets in Singapore, Thailand and Laos, from Mujahideen groups in Afghanistan, and from arms markets in Pakistan. Also, it is known the Indian government provided the initial training and supply of arms. India was also drawn into this conflict when 50,000 troops of the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) operated in Sri Lanka, but failed to achieve their aim. This sympathetic support of the rebel organisation could only be curbed in India in the wake of an indignant wave of public opinion after the tragic assassination of India's ex-prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi.
?
The loss of human beings and resources has been colossal in this conflict. Meanwhile the battle rages on between the LTTE and the Sri Lanka Army under the guidance of foreign mercenary advisors. More than 200,000 Tamil refugees have fled and sought refuge in India.
?
Land-mines
A typical anti-personnel mine is a harmless-looking plastic object that fits easily in the palm of a hand. Yet the human and financial cost of there is almost unimaginable.
?
Every day more than 70 people, most of them innocent children and farmers who have nothing to do with war, get killed or maimed all over the world due to land mines. Nearly 100 million mines already planted in 64 countries Mozambique, Afghanistan and Cambodia could bring death or disability to some 25,000 people a year, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).29 Another 100 million anti-personnel land mines are believed to sit in stockpiles, ready for use.
?
Once planted, mines are uncontrolled and undiscriminating. They cannot distinguish between civilians and soldiers or friends and foes. Besides human injury, these mines cause environmental and economic damage, as millions of mines are lying in fertile agricultural land in many countries. Most of these mines are lying in developing countries torn by civil war. Afghanistan has more than 10 million mines scattered, Angola has 15 million, Mozambique has 2 million and Cambodia has 30 million.
?
The US, Russia and China are the largest producers of anti-tank and anti-personnel mines. The cost of an anti-personnel mine is less than US$ 3 but to remove/clean them up cost US$ 300 to US$ 1000 each. The current annual rate of deployment of mines is 2 million as per UN estimates; during the same period, only 100,000 mines are cleared. Since the mine defusing process is complicated, it would take 1,200 years to defuse the existing mines all over the world at the present rate and the process would cost US$ 33 billion.
?
?
?
?
Small Arms but Global Implications
The role of small arms including land mines in contemporary conflicts is especially evident in the conflicts in Liberia and Somalia.30 During the conflict in Liberia, rival groups of guerrillas were mainly armed with AK-47s and fought amongst themselves for control of the country. In the process they brought commerce to a standstill and drove an estimated 2.3 million people from their homes and villages. Similar was the case in Somalia, where armed factions were responsible for pushing millions to the brink of starvation. In both countries, the UN peacekeeping missions had to fight the various factions to stop the violence and disarm them but were unable to do so.
?
In 1994, the conflict in Rwanda resulted in the deaths of as many as 1 million and forced millions more to flee their homeland and become refugees in the neighbouring countries. This is a classic case of global implications: the Rwanda conflict transformed into a Central African conflict with Zaire (now Republic of Congo) and Burundi directly involved; Uganda and Tanzania indirectly due to flow of refugees, and the Western nations and international community by sending in peacekeepers and NGO workers. Similarly, the fighting in Bosnia resulted in the deaths of nearly 200,000 people and millions became refugees. Peacekeepers are still in Bosnia and clashing with the local population due to huge stockpiles of weapons still in existence (with the locals) and resettlement of returning refugees is continuing.
?
The proliferation of small arms and land mines has become a hazard to UN peacekeeping forces and international workers and towards normal functioning and the reconstruction of the conflict area. Even after formal hostilities have ceased, the presence of small arms poses a continuing threat to international security. In these conflict areas where the economy in ruins and unemployment high, many guerrillas and demobilised soldiers turn to crime to survive, using these weapons or selling them to combatants and crime cartels in other countries. During the 1980s, South African authorities provided small arms to antigovernment guerrillas in Angola and Mozambique; these same guns are no longer required for insurgent operations, and are now smuggled back into South Africa by their former owners and sold to criminal gangs. The weapons provided by the US to the Nicaraguan contras have reportedly been sold to drug syndicates in Colombia.
?
Proposals for Demilitarisation
The Commission on Global Governance31 co-chaired by Ingvar Carlsson (Sweden) and Shridath Ramphal (Guyana) has recommended that:
?
?
?
?
?
?
Conclusion
By one estimate, between 1945 and 1989 there were 138 wars, resulting in some 23 million deaths.32 All 138 were fought in the Third World (developing and poor countries) and were fuelled by weapons provided by the two major powers or their allies. Between 1970 and the end of the cold war in 1989, weapons worth US$168 billion were transferred to the Middle East, US$ 65 billion worth to Africa, US$61 billion to the Far East, US$50 billion to South Asia, and US$44 billion to Latin America. The Soviet Union and the USA accounted for 69% of the US$388 billion total.33 The surfeit of weapons, especially small arms, left over from this era is a key enabling factor in many conflicts scarring the world.
?
The arms trade is still continuing after the cold war. For the major arms exporters-the US, Russia, United Kingdom, France, and Germany - strategic considerations matter less than protecting jobs and industrial bases. The five permanent members of the Security Council provide 86% of the arms exported to developing countries.
?
The only positive effort to keep some check on the arms trade is the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms. The 186 countries belonging to the UN, 80 participated in the register in 1993, 81 in 1994 and 87 in 1995. The shortcoming of this register is that it does not take account of trade in small arms and other light weapons. There is a need to address the transfer of weapons such as land mines and small arms. This is because due to the change in the mode of conflict around the world, there is a spurt in the trade of small arms.
?
The international community has begun to consider the imposition of new international constraints on the small arms trade. The UN has established a special commission, 'the panel of government experts on small arms' to look into the problem, and the major industrial powers have met under the auspices of the Wassenaar Arrangement (a group set up in 1996 to devise new international controls on the spread of dangerous military technologies) to consider similar efforts. Despite all these the progress is slow. Only in the area of land mines have there been positive results, the international ant-land mine campaign received a boost and world-wide publicity with the late Diana, Princess of Wales visiting the land mine-filled Angola. The Global Treaty on the ban in production and use of Anti-Personnel Mines (AP Mines) signed in Canada in December 1997 is an achievement.
?
There is need for caution, and to look toward the future of our planet. The rich and developed countries can close their eyes and continue the supply of weapons to the developing countries. But they will eventually have to pay the price. Technological advances have made national frontiers more porous. States retain sovereignty, but governments have suffered an erosion in their authority. They face the pressures of globalisation at one level and of grassroots movements and, in some cases, demand for devolution (if not secession) at another. In extreme cases, public order may disintegrate and civil institutions collapse in the face of rampant violence, as in Liberia and Somalia. When states collapse and control moves into the hands of criminals, the developed countries are going to have refugees and illegal migration on their doors, more drugs being pushed into their region, and terrorism, environmental disasters and a resurgence of traditional diseases on hand - all phenomena which do not recognise any human made borders. Our common future will depend on the extent to which people and leaders around the world develop the vision of a better future and the strategies, the institutions, and the will to achieve it.
Paper in MSWord format
?