 |
Introduction.
The UN and other international organizations have
adopted measures to increase "transparency" regarding conventional
arms transfers, production, and holdings. These measures take
the form of publication of data, or national exchanges of
unpublished data, on conventional arms exports, imports, production,
acquisition or holdings. There are also data exchanges on
planned future changes in holdings, on military organization
and military exercises, and on export licenses denied.
In the first instance, the sharing of information on conventional
armaments is intended as a confidence-building measure. In
addition, transparency may be a prelude to limits on arms
holdings, production, or trade; it may accompany limits, as
one among a number of mutually-reinforcing verification measures;
or it may be a means of strengthening regimes of voluntary
national restraints on arms holdings, production, acquisition
or exports.
Coverage. This section covers the following fora and
reporting regimes for increased transparency in conventional
armaments and dual-use goods and technology:
The UN Register of Conventional Arms, a published annual
compilation of nationally reported data on conventional arms
exports and imports, as well as supplementary information
on conventional arms holdings and production;
The UN General Assembly's resolutions relating to transparency.
The UN Conference on Disarmament, a forum which in
the past has sought to propose ways to increase Transparency
in Armaments and strengthen the UN Register of Conventional
Arms.
The UN Disarmament Commission, which has also supported
increased Transparency in Armaments.
The Organization of American States Inter-American
Convention on Transparency in Conventional Arms Acquisitions,
which in 1999 established a new international convention to
provide transparency regarding arms acquisition by import
or national production.
The Wassenaar Arrangement, which reinforce national
export controls on conventional weapons and dual-use technology
through exchanges of information on export licenses granted
and denied.
Several other international agreements including measures
of conventional transparency are covered in other sections:
The Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe, which provides
for an annual exchange of data on Treaty-limited equipment,
is covered in the section on that treaty. Data exchanges undertaken
to build confidence within the framework of the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe are covered in the
section European Security Institutions. The Missile Technology
Control Regime (MTCR), under which suppliers maintain voluntary
national limits on exports of longer-range ballistic and cruise
missiles and exchange information relating to such exports,
is covered in the section on Missile Proliferation and Control.
Other agreements concerning limits on conventional arms transfers,
production and holdings, including recent agreements concerning
Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW), are covered in the section
on Conventional Arms Restraints; which previously included
the material on Transparency this section now covers.
UN Register of Conventional Arms. Following the Gulf
War, a number of states expressed interest in restraining
arms sales to the Middle East. This led to suggestions for
global restraints on transfers of conventional arms.
On 23 April 1991, Britain called on the UN to set up a register
of arms sales. On 29 May 1991, US President George Bush called
for a meeting of the five permanent members of the Security
Council to discuss the conventional arms trade in the Middle
East. On 31 May 1991, France called for controls on arms exports
to all regions. On 10 December 1991, a UNGA resolution called
for the creation of a UN Register of Conventional Arms. On
30 July 1992, a panel of experts created under this resolution
finalized the format for reporting arms transfers and the
weapons systems to be covered by the Register {ACR 707.D 1992}.
On 9 December 1992, the UNGA approved by consensus the establishment
of a UN Register of Conventional Arms and called on members
to submit data on their arms transfers in 1992, beginning
30 April 1993. In October 1993, the Secretary-General issued
a report on the Register and released the data submitted by
80 nations, representing 98 percent of the known arms trade
for the year {11.10.93}.
In 1994, 81 states submitted data by the time the Secretary-General
released his report in September {1.9.94}. The response belied
growing dissension among UN members over the direction the
Register should take in the future. In 1995, 85 nations submitted
data on their 1994 arms transfers. However, the Register continued
to be attacked by critics for its inconsistencies and omissions
{11.11.95}. In 1996, 92 states submitted data on arms transfers
in 1995 by the time the Secretary-General released his report
{28.10.96}. Most leading arms exporters submitted data, while
several leading importers did not.
The 1997 Register contained data from 89 states (some of them
submitted after the Secretary-General's report) on their 1996
arms transfers. The entire world's leading arms exporters'
submitted data, while only five of the top ten importers did
so. A UN panel of governmental experts met in 1997 to review
and evaluate the working of the Register, but failed to agree
on any substantive measures to improve it {15.8.97}.
The 1998 Register contained data from 95 states {707.E 1998}.
The Register incorporated the technical changes recommended
in 1997 by the panel of governmental experts {15.8.97}, the
voluntary submissions on weapons holdings submitted by 29
states, and procurement through national production submitted
by 23 states. All of the top ten arms exporters except China
submitted data, while only five of the top ten importers participated.
In 1999, 86 states submitted data on 1998 arms transfers.
China continued its boycott of the Register, protesting the
inclusion of arms exports to Taiwan in the US data. Most Middle
Eastern states continued to boycott the Register {13.8.99}.
Although these specific country gaps persisted, overall participation
in the Register increased substantially in 2000-2002, when
staff members from the UN Department of Disarmament Affairs
and UN delegates who are "Friends of the Register" made a
special effort to encourage countries with null reports (no
trade in or holdings or production of major weapons) to submit
annual data. For the four most recent years (concluding with
submissions in 2004 on arms transfers in 2003), the numbers
of states participating have been 99, 118, 126, and 115, respectively.
At a symposium in 2002, marking the 10th anniversary of the
Register, Under Secretary for Disarmament Affairs Jayantha
Dhanapala noted that over the course of the decade, 162 countries
had participated at least once.
In 2004, the Register was expanded to include small arms and
light weapons {59/86, ACR 801bGA04 14.10} and man-portable
air defense systems (MANPADS) {59/90, ACR 801bGA04 1.11}.
SALW were added in part to encourage African nations to begin
reporting to the Register. The inclusion of MANPADS has been
attributed as a response to international terrorism {2.11.04}.
UNGA. On 29 November 2001 the General Assembly adopted
a resolution on transparency in armaments, 56/24Q, which reaffirms
the UNGA's decision to keep the UN Arms Register under review.
It requests the Secretary General to prepare a report on the
"continuing operation of the Register and its further development,"
"taking into account" the CD's work in the field of transparency
in armaments.{ACR 801bGA01} A similar resolution was passed
in 2002 on the 10th anniversary of the Register {57/75, ACR
801bGA02 22.11}.
Conference on Disarmament (CD). In 1992-1994, the Geneva-based
Conference on Disarmament's ad hoc committee on Transparency
in Armaments (TIA), tasked with proposing additional uses
for the UN Arms Register, debated this issue. In 1995-1997,
the CD could not agree to re-establish the ad hoc committee
due to disagreements over the relationship between conventional
and nuclear disarmament {ACR 805bGA96 3.9; ACR 805bGA97 12.5-27.6;
28.7-12.9}. In 1998, the Special Coordinator for TIA held
discussions on the merits of TIA, the scope for activity on
TIA, and ways for the CD to address TIA {DD 8/9.98}. From
1999 to 2001, the CD has been unable to take any action on
TIA because each year it has failed to agree on program of
work {ACR 805bGA99 18.1. 26.3, 7.9; ACR 805bGA00 7.8-22.9;
ACR 805bGA01 2.8-13.9}. In 2002, the Five Ambassadors' Initiative
was proposed as an attempt to end the deadlock in the CD.
A consensus could never be reached and the proposal was tabled
until the next year's sessions {ACR 805bGA02 31.7-12.9}. During
the 2003 and 2004 sessions, the CD remained unable to agree
to the initiative {ACR 805bCD03 9.9; 805bCD04 7.9}.
Disarmament Commission. In May 1996, the UNDC approved
"Guidelines for International Arms Transfers" {3.5.96}.
Organization of American States: Inter-American Convention
on Transparency in Conventional Weapons Acquisitions. In
June 1999, the OAS approved a treaty on transparency in conventional
arms acquisitions {7.6.99} which was signed by a majority
of OAS members. Canada ratified the convention in 1999; Ecuador,
Guatemala, and Uruguay ratified in 2001; El Salvador and Paraguay
in 2002; Nicaragua in 2003. The convention went into effect
one month after the sixth ratification (Paraguay) was deposited.
According to the convention's article I and its annex, the
member states will annually exchange data on the "purchase,
lease, procurement, donation, loan or any other method" of
acquisition of conventional arms. The arms covered are the
same as those covered in the UN Register of Conventional Arms:
tanks, armored combat vehicles, artillery, combat aircraft,
attack helicopters, warships, and missiles and missile launchers.
Wassenaar Arrangement. Created in 1949 by the Western
alliance to prevent the transfer of militarily useful technology
to the communist states, the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral
Export Controls (COCOM), which was the predecessor to the
Wassenaar Arrangement, restricted international transfers
of items in three categories:
The Industrial List (dual-use items with both civilian
and military applications, including nuclear-relevant, dual-use
items);
The International Atomic Energy List (items useful
for nuclear-weapon design and testing); and
The International Munitions List (conventional arms).
COCOM's members comprised all NATO states except Iceland,
plus Australia and Japan.
With the end of the Cold War, the determination to restrict
technology exports to Central and Eastern Europe faced. COCOM
members decided, however, that some form of multilateral export
regime was still needed to monitor and restrain the spread
of dual-use technology to countries seeking to obtain weapons
of mass destruction (WMD). On 17 November 1993, COCOM members
agreed that by 31 March 1994 they would replace COCOM with
a new, expanded-membership organization. COCOM was disbanded
at the end of March 1994; but the formation of a successor
regime stalled, primarily over the issue of membership. On
11-12 September 1995, a group began to flesh out the successor
organization, temporarily referred to as the New Forum.
On 18 December 1995, 28 nations meeting in Wassenaar, Holland,
agreed to create the "Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls
for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies."
After resolving differences over issues such as early notification
of license approvals that had previously been denied by another
participant, on 12 July 1996, 33 founding members adopted
the "Initial Elements," the Arrangement's founding document,
at an inaugural plenary in Vienna {3.4.96; 11-12.7.96}.
In 2000 the group decided to institute stringent controls
over shoulder-fired missiles, based largely on Western, fears
about the trade in Stinger missiles.
The Wassenaar Arrangement aims to promote transparency and
reinforce existing national export controls on conventional
arms and dual-use technology. Licensing decisions are left
to individual states. Participating states exchange aggregate
data every six months on both approvals and denials of licenses
for the transfer of controlled items to non-Wassenaar countries.
Controlled items are itemized in a List of Dual-Use Goods
and Technologies and a Munitions List. Prompt notification
(within 60 days) is to take place for each export license
denial and for each license approval that undercuts another
country's previous denial of "an essentially identical transaction."
Participation is voluntary, since there is no enforcement
mechanism. All decisions are made by consensus (see the Summary
of Initial Elements below).
The Initial Elements call for a plenary meeting "at least
once a year." The Fifth plenary and First Review Conference
took place in December 1999 in Vienna {1-3.12.99}. The review
conference examined many proposals for strengthening the arrangement.
The only significant decision, however, was an amendment of
Appendix 3 to the Initial Elements. Members agreed to amend
the dual-use goods and technology control list and to update
the lists in timely manner to keep pace with technological
and other developments.
Review of the Wassenaar Arrangement. During its 7th
plenary meeting in Vienna (6 7 December 2001), the Wassenaar
participating states amended the arrangement's founding document
by adding a new section declaring that they will "continue
to prevent the acquisition of conventional arms and dual-use
goods and technologies by terrorist groups and organisations
as well as by individual terrorists." This was the first amendment
of the "Initial Elements" (the core document of the Wassenaar
Arrangement) since its creation in 1996.
In December of 2004, the members approved measures that would
further adapt the Wassenaar Arrangement to take on the threat
of terrorism. Stricter regulations were put in place with
regard to the export of SALW and MANPADS. Arms brokers would
also be placed under increased scrutiny. The authority to
approve the export of MANPADS, for example, would be reserved
for those at the "senior policy level" {12.12.04}.
Location and sessions. The Wassenaar Arrangement's
secretariat is located in Vienna. Initial exchange of data
began in September 1996 {1.9.96}. Data exchanges and General
Working Group meetings are continuing.
Weapons. "Conventional weapons," as defined by the
UN for the purpose of the Register of Conventional Arms, comprising
the five categories covered by the Conventional Forces in
Europe Treaty: main battle tanks; armored personnel carriers;
attack helicopters; combat aircraft; and artillery, plus combat
ships and missiles and missile launchers {10.12.91}. "Small
arms and light weapons" include firearms, hand grenades, bazookas,
and MANPADS {13.11.95, 12.12.04}.
Membership in the Wassenaar Arrangement
Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada,
Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New
Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania,
Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine,
United Kingdom, United States.
Total members: 33
Summary of Initial Elements of the Wassenaar Arrangement
I. Purposes
1. Promoting transparency and greater responsibility on arms
and dual-use technology transfers
2. Complementing and reinforcing existing control regimes
3. Enhancing cooperation to prevent acquisition of arms and
dual-use technologies by states or regions of concern
4. The arrangement is not directed against any state or group
of states
II. Scope
1. Participants will meet on a regular basis.
2. Participants will exchange, on a voluntary basis, information
to enhance transparency and lead to discussions on coordinating
national control policies.
3. License decisions will be left up to the individual member
states.
4. Participants agree to notify each other of transfers and
denials to non-participant states. Notification of a denial
by one participant does not require other participants to
deny similar licenses, but participants will notify, "preferably
within 30 days, but not later than within 60 days, all other
Participating States of an approval of a license which has
been denied by another Participating State for an essentially
identical transaction during the last three years."
5. Work on further guidelines and procedures will continue.
6. This arrangement will be assessed regularly, beginning
in 1999.
III. Control Lists
1. Controlled items are set forth in Dual Use List and Munitions
List.
2. The Dual Use List includes two annexes: "sensitive" (tier
2) items and "very sensitive" (sub-set tier 2) items.
3. The control lists will be reviewed regularly.
IV. Procedures for General Information Exchange
1. Participants will exchange general information of risks
of sensitive exports and export control policies.
2. Elements of general information exchange are provided in
Appendix 1.
V. Procedures for the Exchange of Information on Dual-Use
Goods and Technology
1. Participants will notify each other of licenses denied
to non-participants.
2. Data on tier-1 items will be exchanged twice a year.
3. Tier 2 and sub-set tier 2 item denials will be announced
no later than 60 days after the date of the denial.
4. Tier 2 item transfers/approvals notification will take
place twice a year.
5. Countries will "exert extreme vigilance" for sub-set tier
2 items, and compare national export policies for these items.
6. Participants may request this data through other diplomatic
channels.
VI. Procedures for the Exchange of Information on Arms
1. Participants will exchange general information and concerns
about arms accumulations.
2. Data on deliveries of conventional arms (from the UN Register
of Conventional Arms) will be exchanged every six months.
3. This data can also be requested through normal diplomatic
channels.
VII. Meetings and Administration
1. Participants will meet "periodically."
2. Plenary meetings will be held at least once a year; chair
will rotate annually.
3. Working Groups may be established by the Plenary.
4. There will be a secretariat and a staff.
5. All decisions within the framework of the Arrangement will
be made by consensus.
VIII. Participation
Admission of new members is by consensus.
IX. Confidentiality
Information exchanges and discussions are confidential.
Appendices:
Appendix 1: General Information Exchange
Appendix 2: Specific Information Exchange on Dual-Use Goods
and Technologies
Appendix 3: Specific Information Exchange on Arms
Appendix 4: Participation Criteria (Participants must be producers/exporters
of arms, adhere to non-proliferation policies, and maintain
fully effective export controls)
{See 250d 1996 (Nonproliferation Regimes) for complete text.}
Further Information
Wassenaar Arrangement, The Amended Arrangement: http://www.wassenaar.org/docs/IE96.html
Organization of American States, Inter-American Convention
on Transparency in Conventional Weapons Acquisitions:
http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-64.htm
United Nations, United Nations Register of Conventional
Arms: http://www.un.org/Depts/dda/CAB/register.htm
|