South African arms transfers under scrutiny

INTERVIEW / Robert Thomson

As negotiations follow their course within the confines of the United Nations towards a legally binding Arms Trade Transfers agreement, expected for 2012, the South African organization Ceasefire took on itself the task of monitoring their own international arms trade, in light of information processed by the South African conventional arms committee.

The report South African Arms Trade Dossier, 2000-2009, was based on information open to the public but never before released, the result of an effort to secure permission to access the data that took three and a half years. “The report was groundbreaking because it made public information that should be public but does not get out”, said Robert Thomson, (photo) Ceasfire Steering Committee member and leading researcher responsible for the dossier.

Among the report’s conclusions it notes that 58 countries that received arms from South Africa failed to meet at least one criterion necessary to authorize arms trade. Each criterion was breached by at least six countries who bought arms from SA. It goes on to state that “R13, 2 billion of arms (1,7 billion US dollars) were sold to these countries in the ten year period, of which 60% comprised sensitive weapons”.

The report had repercussions throughout Africa being given much attention in newspapers and the media, and was greeted with interest by the South African congress and sparked a back and forth between report authors and the Committee.

Comunidad Segura interviewed Robert Thomson, lead researcher, about the Dossier, and its repercussions. Thomson believes there is too little monitoring of arms trade transfers currently in the world, and as the report points out, that the arms trade and arms manufacturing is usually enveloped in a culture of secrecy. As the information comes to light, Thomson comments on the role of civil society: “This government is progressive and open to the public generally and parliament too. We have good relations with the government. But government being government, it needs watchdogs like us”

What was the goal of your report?

To expose the problems that relate to a failure to apply criteria and failure to meet standards of transparency make arms transfers public, and ask parliament to hold the arms control committee accountable to parliament. To make sure the South African conventional arms committee is doing its job properly.

How was the report received in South Africa?

The dossier was very widely reported on in South Africa in newspapers and radio and good slot on national television. It was also widely circulated in Africa. We also had a response from the committee itself and a response from our arms industry, and we responded in turn to them, that is on the www.defenseweb.co.za

Is there a Ceasefire website?

Our website has been hacked just before going public with the report. I don’t necessary associate the two events; I think it was a coincidence.

Legally countries are not forced to disclose arms sales…

Legally countries are not forced to disclose arms sales but the United Nations has a register of arms transfers, it is public and anyone can log on and see it. Many countries participate in it and South Africa too. However it is limited to major weapons systems like battleships, fighter jets, and missile systems, it does not include small arms and light weapons, it does not cover ammunition or hand grenades, mortars etc..

What institutions govern arms transfers in South Africa?

The South African conventional arms committee issues an annual report. The Central Firearms Control Register is largely about controlling firearms; there is the conventional arms control committee about import and export.

Did you use data provided by the Committee?

We are using data provided by the committee and had to follow legal process that took 3 and a half years to get the data. The law requires it to be transparent, but the information had never come out to the public. The report was groundbreaking because it made public information that should be public but does not get out. We succeeded in obtaining the annual reports issued by the National Conventional Arms Control Committee from 200o to 2009.

What is the main topic of concern to come out of the report?

Many countries that buy from South Africa, we worry that we are selling arms to countries with poor human rights records. Colombia, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, these are some of our major clients.

There were complaints that some countries ought not to be in that list,how do you see the case of Brazil for example?

Brazil fails on human rights, according to the Bonn center, www.bicc.de

How does one determine who are the appropriate trading partners?

What we referred to the Bonn International Center for Conversion, they do a rating of every country in the world with respect to the criteria required by the European Union for arms sales. Some of those criteria are similar to SA criteria. So we used the relevant criteria also used by South Africa.

What criteria apply to authorize arms transfers?

The criteria we used, for example, is whether the countries buying our weapons respect human rights, whether there is an arms embargo against them, and of course, issues pertaining to their own gun control: we should not sell arms to countries that don’t control their own sale of arms to others. Arms should not be sold to a country if it is engaged in conflict. One example of this is the fact we’ve been selling weapons to India and Pakistan, we should not be selling to both sides of their conflict… it amounts to fueling the conflict over Kashmir.

The report mentions the sales of 'sentitive weapons', what are they?

Sensitive weapons are explosives, large-calibre arms & automatic weapons, guns & missiles, bombs, grenades, tanks, fighter aircraft, attack helicopters and naval vessels that could cause severe casualties &/or damage & destruction; and infantry hand-held & portable assault weapons & associated ammunition of calibre less than 12.7mm.
 
They exclude electronic equipment, radio & communication equipment, mine-clearing & -detecting equipment, non lethal pyrotechnical & riot-control products; other non-lethal equipment;and general services

Who else took part in the Arms Trade Dossier?

The South African History Archive and the Open Democracy Advice Center pursued the disclosure of information for us.

Would you say that arms transfers are being better monitored today than in the past?

No, we don’t have enough monitoring of arms transfers, and it’s not growing at all. Arms transfers are not being adequately monitored, not in Africa. We had some successes. The landmines campaign was very successful in South Africa, and we are working on cluster ammunition with the department of international relations and cooperation, that corresponds to our foreign affairs office. This government is progressive and open to the public generally and parliament too. We have good relations with the government. But government being government, it needs watchdogs like us.

Read Further:

The South Africa Arms Trade Dossier (PDF)

Green light for the Arms Trade Treaty by Comunidad Segura

Sources cited in the Ceasefire Campaign report:

The Bonn International Center for Conversion

The United Nations Register of Conventional Weapons

The Stockholm international peace research institute