No. 22, (September 1993)
Published by the Federation of American Scientists Fund, the ASM is compiled and edited by Lora Lumpe, assisted by Paul F. Pineo. Our goal in producing the newsletter is to provide timely information and context to policymakers, the media and concerned citizens, in furtherance of responsible U.S. conventional arms transfer policies. This publication may reproduced or cited freely. It is available from the FAS Fund at 307 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 [phone (202) 675-1018] at a cost of $20 per year (6-8 issues). The ASM Project is supported with grants from The John H. Merck Fund, The Ploughshares Fund, The Compton Foundation, Inc., The Winston Foundation for World Peace, and The S.H. Cowell Fund. The Federation of American Scientists is a non-profit civic organization of natural and social scientists and engineers concerned with science and society issues in general, and matters of international security in particular. Editorial: Dump the "Kempthorne Amendment" Spurred by government promotional policies and military aid programs, American arms exports reached an all time high of more than $30 billion during fiscal year 1993. Even so, some Senators, concerned about defense layoffs, want to provide still more subsidies. The Senate's fiscal year 1994 DOD authorization bill contains a provision---introduced by Sen. Dirk Kempthorne---which authorizes the expenditure of $25 million to establish a new $1 billion loan guarantee program. The House bill does not contain this program. Whether it is passed into law will be decided in the House-Senate conference during the latter half of October. The Pentagon did not request and does not support the loan guarantees. Rather, the program has been promoted assiduously by the arms industry lobby, which touts it as "a blue collar jobs program." While the Senate usually is not so supportive of jobs programs, this one sailed through. Even some of the staunchest proponents of arms control in the Senate supported this arms-sales-for-jobs program (see box, p. 5). But, with American soldiers currently facing American-made weapons in Somalia, it should be clear that arms exports are not a cost-free substitute for the necessary downsizing of the U.S. arms industry. Arms exports enable arms races and wars. The proposed loan guarantee program will particularly exacerbate (and further underwrite) the arms race between Greece and Turkey. While all NATO member countries are eligible under the amendment to receive guarantees, the countries on the southern tier of the alliance are the most likely recipients of such aid. In addition, European governments will probably respond to a new American aid program by providing increased financing and marketing assistance to their industry, fuelling other arms races around the world. The Kempthorne provision is also budgetary "smoke and mirrors." While burying a new military aid program in the unwieldy Pentagon budget, lawmakers are cutting such funds in the foreign aid budget, in response to pressure from constituents to reduce foreign aid in general, and military aid in particular. This shuffling of the accounts is inconsistent and deceptive. Moreover, instead of costing "only" $25 million as advertised, this program could cost taxpayers $1 billion if the loan recipients default on their payments. Guarantees are needed precisely because the recipient is a credit risk, and weapons loans have a history of going bad: During Operation Desert Shield/Storm, the U.S. forgave Egypt $7 billion in past military loans; and an Italian bank is currently suing the United States to recover $240 million in defaulted Iraqi loans which the government guaranteed. Finally, the White House is in the midst of a major review of conventional arms trade policies. By creating a new loan guarantee program for arms exports, Congress will pre-judge the outcome of the review. The Conference Committee should delete the Kempthorne amendment from the Pentagon bill. --by Lora Lumpe, editor of the Arms Sales Monitor Clinton Admin. Watch: Still No Policy on Conventional Arms Sales... 27 September---President Clinton unfurls his administration's much-anticipated non-proliferation policy review in a speech before the UN General Assembly. Proposals on chemical, biological and nuclear arms control and missile-related export controls are included. But, while he talks in his speech about the devastation caused by wars raging around the world, of the human toll these wars take, and of the burgeoning need for UN peace-keeping missions created by them, he offers no initiatives to stem the proliferation of conventional weapons. At a background press briefing at the UN, a Senior Administration Official says that as a follow-up to the proposals released today, the Administration "will be taking a serious look in the coming months" at conventional arms transfer policy. According a White House fact sheet on the non-proliferation policies, the conventional arms review will take into account "national security, arms control, trade, budgetary and economic competitiveness considerations." Admin. Seeks Repeal of FMS Recoupment Fees 8 September---The Pentagon sends Congress draft legislation (S.1474) which would amend the Arms Export Control Act, repealing now-mandatory "recoupment" fees on Foreign Military Sales (FMS). The fees are added to the price of exports, in order to recover part of the taxpayer-funded R&D for the weapon. Industry opposes the fees because the higher price makes U.S. weapons less competitive. The arms industry successfully lobbied the Bush Administration last year to remove non-statutorily-mandated recoupment fees for direct commercial sales (see ASM No. 18 p. 4) but was not able to persuade them to seek the repeal of the fees on FMS at that time. But, with brilliant lobbying strategy, advocates for the FMS program are now arguing that they need the fee repealed in order to "level the playing field" with the commercial sales program. As of early October, the bill has no Senate sponsors. `Bottom Up Review': Recipe for Intervention 1 September---"Bottom-Up Review: Forces for a New Era," the Clinton Pentagon's much-delayed review and pronouncement of post-Cold War force and procurement needs is released. The operative assumption of the blueprint is that U.S. forces must be able to fight and win two Major Regional Contingencies (MRCs) simultaneously and on short notice. For this, rapidly deployable, interventionary forces are essential. According to Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, the following "Critical Force Enhancements" are needed: Additional pre-positioned Army equipment Additional airlift/sealift capabilities Improved anti-armor and precision-guided munitions More fast-arriving Naval air power Improved Army National Guard combat brigade readiness Improved Army Guard/Reserve support force readiness Improved Command, Control, Communication and Intelligence Retained Marine Corps end strength While the report does not address the role that arms transfers can play in fostering the MRCs that the review assumes U.S. forces will fight, it does cite Operation Just Cause in Panama, Operation Desert Storm against Iraq, and Operation Restore Hope in Somalia as the types of conflicts U.S. forces will face. In each of these cases, arms transfers directly enabled the aggression or fuelled the instability that necessitated the military operation; in two of the three cases, the weapons came primarily from the U.S. ITAR Amended Substantially 22 July---Major revision to the International Traffic in Armaments Regulations (ITAR), which govern implementation of the Arms Export Control Act, enter into effect today. The changes are intended to "clarif[y] existing regulations and reduce the regulatory burden on exporters." The most significant changes are: an increase in validity of commercial arms export licenses from three years to four; a revision of the policy used by the State Department to designate defense articles, to take into account civil applications and functional equivalences; several new exemptions from licensing requirements, including exports under approved manufacturing or technical assistance agreements, spare parts valued at $500 or less, intra-company transfers of components being sent abroad for assembly, temporary imports for repair or service, and weapons previously licensed for temporary export to trade shows. The Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) and other arms industry representatives worked closely with the State Department to enact these revisions. AIA informed the Undersecretary of State for International Security Affairs (Lynn Davis) at its International Council meeting in April that "early implementation [of the new regulations] would be read as a signal by industry and government personnel that there was no intention of returning to the strong anti-arms transfer policy of the Carter Administration."
Legislation: _____________________________________box__________________________ A Call for Sales Limits 30 July---Over a quarter of the House signs on to a letter to President Clinton urging "fundamental re-evaluation of U.S. arms transfer policy." The lawmakers note that U.S. arms sales have doubled since the end of the Cold War to an average of $17 billion per year. They state that "it is urgently in the national interest to find a way to stop this spiral of militarization," fuelled by U.S. and others' sales. As an interim step, the legislators suggest a "short-term moratorium on arms transfers to unelected or repressive governments or governments not complying with the new United Nations arms trade registry." Among the 111 signers are several Members, including the originator of the letter Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA), who represent districts with significant arms industry. Of this, they say: "The public...must understand that arms sales to developing countries are not a cost-free way to extend military production lines. That understanding would be greatly enhanced, at least in this country, if you explained that the last three times U.S. forces went into action---Panama, Iraq, and Somalia---they faced weapons or weapons technology either exported or financed by our own government." In August the President sends a polite response, in which he informs Mr. Berman of his on-going conventional arms trade policy review. ___________________________________________________end box_________________________ Bills Authorizing Foreign Aid Programs Still Pending in Senate On 30 September, President Clinton signed into law the fiscal year 1994 foreign operations appropriations act. The contents of that law will be summarized in the next issue. Meanwhile, the foreign aid authorization bill has not been, and probably will not be, finalized and enacted into law. (In fact, a foreign aid authorizing bill has not been passed since 1987.) Nevertheless, relevant provisions from the pending Senate version of the bill (S.1467) are summarized below, on the understanding that some of these measures will be offered as amendments to the Foreign Relations Authorization Act (S.12 81) when it is considered by the full Senate in mid to late October. S.1281 authorizes appropriations for the State Department for fiscal years 1994 and 1995. Legislative provisions from both bills relating to arms transfers, and not included in the House-passed companion bills (see ASM No. 21), are highlighted here. After S.1281 is passed, a conference committee will then reconcile the bill with the House version. `Spoils of War' Subject to AECA. Title V of S.1281 states that all weapons captured in war by U.S. forces can be transferred to another person, group or government only under "the terms, conditions and requirements applicable to the transfer of property of the same type otherwise owned by the United States"---i.e., the Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act. In response to allegations that Syria received some Iraqi weapons in return for its participation in the Gulf War, the bill explicitly states that captured weapons may not be transferred to any country determined by the Secretary of State to sponsor terrorist groups or actions (see box, p. 7). The bill mandates that within 90 days of enactment the President submit a report describing `spoils of war' taken in Operation Desert Storm and subsequently transferred to a third party. "Such report shall be submitted in an unclassified form to the extent possible." Unlimited arms sales to Taiwan. Section 707 of S.1281 amends the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 [PL 96-8] to state that Sections 3(a) and 3(b) of that act take precedence over the 17 August 1982 Joint United States-China Communique. The Communique states: "the United States Government ... does not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan, that the arms sales to Taiwan will not exceed, either in qualitative or in quantitative terms, the level of those supplied in recent years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and China, and that it intends to reduce gradually its sales of arms to Taiwan, leading over a period of time to a final resolution." In contrast, Section 3(a) of the Taiwan Relations Act states that "the United States will make available to Taiwan such defense articles and services in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a self-defense capability." Section 3(b) states that the volume of arms sales shall be "based solely upon...the needs of Taiwan." Sen. Frank Murkowski, the sponsor of the measure, argues that the Joint Communique is merely a policy statement, without the force of law, whereas the Taiwan Relations Act is law. Murkowski says that the Administration "has not, up to now, seriously implemented paragraph 6 [of the Communique] in a way which would violate Section 3(b)." The $600 million of sales in 1982, the base year of the Communique, was sufficiently high that "as a practical matter, Taiwan's needs did not exceed, to any great degree, what we were willing to sell to them." But, he rightfully adds, "smoke and mirrors" have been used to circumvent the limit, and in certain cases the policy requirement to reduce sales levels has been blatantly ignored, as in the $6 billion sale of 150 F-16 aircraft to Taiwan last September. The Administration opposes the amendment, and the government of Taiwan is non-committal, both fearing hostile Chinese reaction. Yet, the Pentagon has notified Congress of nearly $2 billion worth of arms sales to Taiwan during June-September 1993 (see p. 9). Military aid reform. Section 105 of S.1467 revises the justification for military aid contained in the Foreign Assistance Act (Sections 501 and 502), eliminating references to the containment of communism and instead emphasizing as objectives: promoting arms control, "legitimate self-defense," democratic governance and participation in multilateral peacekeeping operations; combatting narcotrafficking; meeting urgent humanitarian needs; increasing respect for human rights; promoting the professionalism of the armed forces; and furthering "the rationalization, standardization and interoperability of the military forces of friendly foreign countries with the Armed Forces of the United States." Expanded IMET codified, concerns noted. Section 105 of also amends Section 541 of the Foreign Assistance Act to allow International Military Education and Training (IMET) funds to educate non-military personnel (including legislators) at U.S. military education and training facilities or other schools and institutions in the United States. or abroad. The Committee mandates that all IMET training---whether short-term, technical training or longer-term professional training---foster greater respect for and understanding of democracy, principles of civilian control of the military, and internationally recognized human rights. The bill's report notes that the Committee "is deeply distressed by the number of IMET graduates who have been involved in human rights violations and anti-democratic activities, including nine who subsequently became heads of state by coup or other violent means." Study on balance of aid. S.1467 calls for a report on the appropriate balance between military and economic aid is due to Congress six months after enactment into law. The report is to include an analysis of the security threats and economic challenges facing aid recipients and a list of which countries face a minimal military threat, making a shift from military to economic aid possible. 7:10 ratio for Greek:Turkish EDA. Section 305 of S.1467 amends the Foreign Assistance Act by adding a new Section 516(g), which establishes a 7:10 balance of excess defense articles (EDA)---surplus weapons given away for free---transferred to Greece and Turkey. Such a ratio currently governs the provision of military aid to the two. Turkey has been receiving substantial amounts of weaponry for cheap or free through the EDA program. Classified sales notifications. Section 307 of S.1467 amends Sections 36(b) and (c) of the Arms Export Control Act to mandate that for classified arms sales notifications to Congress, at least the name of the recipient country or international organization to receive the material and the general category of weapons or services to be transferred must be reported in unclassified form. New reporting requirements on offsets. Section 308 of S.1467 requires that information on any direct or indirect offset agreements under negotiation or consideration as part of the sale of weapons or services subject to Congressional notification be included in the quarterly reports due to Congress under Section 36(a) of the Arms Export Control Act, and in the 36(b) and (c) sales notifications. Section 36(b)(M) of the Arms Export Control Act allows Congress to request information concerning offset commitments made by the U.S. government in the negotiation of foreign military sales. But since the U.S. government typically does not negotiate offsets, and the law does not extend to offsets negotiated by industry, the measure is not terribly meaningful. Another law (Defense Production Act Amendments of 1992 [PL 102-558]) already requires U.S. companies to provide information on offsets exceeding $5 million to the Department of Commerce. This new provision will ensure that Congress receives timely notification of this same information, of interest to the Committee so that it can more accurately assess the net "jobs" impact of potential sales. As the Committee report explains: "In recent years, offset agreements requiring U.S. purchases or marketing of foreign goods and services in exchange for the purchases of U.S. military equipment have greatly expanded. Such agreements may result in some loss of U.S. jobs and business. In light of the fact that foreign military sales are sometimes advocated on the basis of the employment produced for the defense industry by such sales, it is important that the committee have information on accompanying offset agreements." Ban on indirect bribery to make sales. Section 309 of S.1467 amends Section 39 of the Arms Export Control Act to prohibit the approval of any foreign military sale in which "a third-party incentive payment is offered to any U.S. company or individual in order to induce that company or individual to purchase foreign articles, services or equipment as part of an offset agreement." The report explains: "The committee provision would prohibit incentive payments or compensation paid by a U.S. supplier of defense articles or services to any other U.S. company or individual to induce that company or individual to purchase or acquire goods or services provided by a foreign entity in order to satisfy an offset agreement made with a foreign country in connection with the sale of military articles or services....It is aimed solely at those instances where the defense contractor or subcontractor seeks to make a payment to a third party to induce it to choose a foreign company over an American competitor." New reporting requirements on coproduction deals. Section 310(a) of S.1467 amends the Arms Export Control Act to mandate that the quarterly reports due under Section 36(a) include information on all government-to-government agreements for the foreign coproduction of defense articles of U.S. origin. The report is to include the foreign countries or organizations involved, a description and estimated value and quantity of the articles authorized to be produced, the restrictions on third-country transfers and a description of controls incorporated into the agreement to ensure compliance with this. Section 310(b) creates a new Section 32 in the Arms Export Control Act, to establish sanctions against foreign countries or firms that violate the third-country re-transfer restrictions. Arms sales to Indonesia. Section 514(a) requires the President to make a determination as to whether the human rights situation in East Timor has improved before any government negotiated Foreign Military Sales may be approved, or any privately negotiated commercial sales licensed for Indonesia. A list of factors to be taken into consideration are included. House, Senate DOD Authorization Bills The Senate passed S.1298, its version of the fiscal year 1994 DOD authorization bill, on 14 September by a 92-7 vote. The House passed its bill, H.R.2401, on 29 September by a 268 to 162 vote. Both bills include relevant policy and programs. Issues at variance will be resolved in Conference Committee, set to begin the week of 11 October and run for 2-3 weeks. Arms sales = conversion? The House bill contains an amendment, offered on the floor by Reps. Tom Andrews (D-ME) and John Kasich (R-OH), which bars the use of defense conversion funds to finance the sale or transfer of weapons or related services or articles. The provision passed by a strongly bi-partisan 256-160 vote. The amendment was offered in direct response to arms industry lobbying efforts to divert substantial amounts of conversion funds to establish a loan guarantee program for arms sales (see ASM Alert! 20 May 1993). The Administration apparently supports the provision. In a letter to the editor of the L.A. Times <8 Sept. 1993>, Undersecretary of Defense John Deutch stated emphatically: "if the Administration were to support loan guarantees in the future, the funds would not be diverted from defense conversion." New aid program for arms sales established. The Senate bill creates a $1 billion loan guarantee program for arms exports in fiscal year 1994. The Pentagon will administer the program, with NATO members (which includes Turkey and Greece), Japan, Australia, South Korea and Israel eligible. $25 million is authorized to underwrite the loans---as insurance against default. In addition to undergoing the usual review procedure, the National Security Council is directed to review all sales under this program to determine that any such sales are "in accord with United States security interests, that it contributes to collective defense burden sharing, and that it is consistent with United States non-proliferation goals." The administration did not request the program, which was amended to the Senate Armed Service Committee's markup of the bill by Senator Dirk Kempthorne (R-ID). During full Senate consideration of the bill, Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-AZ) introduced an amendment to strip this program from the bill. Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Sam Nunn introduced a motion to table (kill) Bingaman's amendment, which passed by 63-37 votes (see box). _______________________________box___________________________________ Roll Call: Senate Vote on the Kempthorne Amendment YEAS: in effect, a vote to establish a new loan guarantee program for arms sales Baucus (D-MT) Bennett (R-UT) Bond (R-MO) Boren (D-OK) Breaux (D-LA) Brown (R-CO) Bums (R-MT) Chafee (R-RI) Coats (R-IN) Cochran (R-MS) Cohen (R-ME) Coverdell (R-GA) Craig (R-ID) D'Amato (R-NY) Danforth (R-MO) Dodd (D-CT) Dole (R-KS) Domenici (R-NM) Durenberger (R-MN) Faircloth (R-NC) Feinstein (D-CA) Ford (D-KY) Gorton (R-WA) Graham (D-FL) Gramm (R-TX) Gregg (R-NH) Hatch (R-UT) Heflin (D-AL) Helms (R-NC) Hollings (D-SC) Hutchison (R-TX) Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (R-VT) Johnston (D-LA) Kempthorne (R-ID) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerrey (D-NE) Kerry (D-MA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Lieberman (D-CT) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN) Mack (R-FL) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Mikulski (D-MD) Mitchell (D-ME) Nickles (R-OK) Nunn (D-GA) Packwood (R-OR) Pell (D-RI) Pressler (R-SD) Robb (D-VA) Rockefeller (D-WV) Roth (R-DE) Shelby (D-AL) Simpson (R-WY) Smith (R-NH) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Thurmond (R-SC) Wallop (R-WY) Warner (R-VA) NAYS: a vote opposing the program Akaka (D-HI) Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Bradley (D-NJ) Bryan (D-NV) Bumpers (D-AR) Byrd (D-WV) Campbell (D-CO) Conrad (D-ND) Daschle (D-SD) DeConcini (D-AZ) Dorgan (D-ND) Exon (D-NE) Feingold (D-WI) Glenn (D-OH) Grassley (R-IA) Harkin (D-IA) Hatfield (R-OR) Kassebaum (R-KS) Kohl (D-WI) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Matthews (D-TN) Metzenbaum (D-OH) Moseley-Braun(D-IL) Moynihan (D-NY) Murkowski (R-AK) Murray (D-WA) Pryor (D-AR) Reid (D-NV) Riegle (D-MI) Sarbanes (D-MD) Sasser (D-TN) Simon (D-IL) Wellstone (D-MN) Wofford (D-PA) And the Administration...? During the Senate debate over arms sales loan guarantees, letters from Clinton Administration officials were used to bolster both sides' cases. Proponents of the program waived a June letter from Commerce Secretary Ron Brown to Martin Marietta CEO Norm Augustine, in which Brown says: "The [Commerce] Department has been a supporter of defense export loan guarantee program proposals in the past and will continue to support them in the future if viable within funding constraints." But opponents had a more recent letter in hand, from Undersecretary of Defense John Deutch to the editor of the L.A. Times, saying: "the Administration has not yet determined the suitability or efficacy of government-backed loan guarantees for defense exports. The Defense Department is currently evaluating loan guarantees as one of several possible tools to help defense contractors remain viable as U.S. military needs decline." Arms sales commission created. Another provision sponsored by Rep. Kasich establishes a National Commission on Arms Control. Comprising 12 voting members, the Commission will study "the factors which contribute to the global proliferation of strategic and conventional military weapons and related equipment and the technology necessary to produce such weapons and equipment." The voting members will be appointed by the President, and the House and Senate Majority and Minority leaders. Eighteen months after the members are empaneled, the Commission is to submit a report to the President containing recommendations on unilateral and multilateral initiatives to "stop the global proliferation of strategic and conventional military weapons and related equipment" and to promote conversion of foreign and domestic weapons industries. Bahrain eligible for excess articles. As a reward for its fairly self-interested assistance during Operation Desert Shield/Storm, Section 1034 of the House bill would make Bahrain eligible to receive Excess Defense Articles (EDA) under the Foreign Assistance Act's Southern Regions Amendment (Section 516). Other eligible countries include Turkey, Greece, Egypt, Israel, Morocco and Oman. Industry concerned about EDA. The arms industry is concerned that excess defense article give-aways are cutting into the sales market, meaning a loss of work and profit. Thus, the Senate bill recommends that the President be required to consider, on a case-by-case basis, "the effects of a transfer of excess defense articles on the national technology and industrial base." ________________________________box__________________________________ ______ EDA Hotline The on-line record of weapons transferred under the Excess Defense Articles provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act, mandated in last year's DOD authorization bill (see ASM No. 21 p.9), is up and running. Through the Pentagon's "Bulletin Board Service" (BBS), users can obtain information about articles to be transferred, their original and current cash values, the date of Congressional notification, the relevant section of the Foreign Assistance Act under which the articles are transferred, and the Service responsible for the transfer. The BBS currently contains data on EDA transfers only during fiscal years 1992 and 1993. Only the date of Congressional notification and the date of authorization to consummate the transfer are included. By the end of the year, the BBS will include the delivery date, as well. To find out what the Pentagon is giving away and to whom, dial up (703) 697-3943 on your computer modem. Resurrection of SDAF? The Administration's fiscal year 1994 budget eliminated the Special Defense Acquisition Fund (SDAF)---a revolving fund used to procure and stockpile popular export weapons. The House bill urges the Pentagon to maintain the fund and recommends a $266 million budget in fiscal year 1994. According to the HASC report, "The partial liquidation of SDAF will affect the defense industrial base with the negative implications of increasing costs, loss of jobs, and inability to meet requests [for exports] on a timely manner." Although a Pentagon program, SDAF is considered "security assistance," which falls under the jurisdiction of the foreign aid bills. Both the House-passed version and the pending Senate version of the foreign aid authorization bill eliminate the fund. Landmine export ban extended. Passed by a 100-0 vote, an amendment to S.1298 sponsored by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) extends the prohibition initiated last year on the transfer of all anti-personnel landmines for three years. The measure also reasserts that U.S. policy seeks verifiable international agreements to prohibit the sale or transfer of, and to limit the production of, anti-personnel landmines. It states the belief of Congress that the President should submit the 1980 "Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects" [!] to the Senate for ratification. In particular, the bill urges, the U.S. government should participate in a UN conference to review Protocol II, the Landmine Protocol, of the Convention. Leahy points out in the text of the amendment that small amounts of money and few American jobs are involved in landmine exports: "During the past ten years, the Administration has approved ten licenses for the commercial export of anti-personnel landmines with a total value of $980,000 and the sale under the Foreign Military Sales program of 108,852 anti-personnel landmines." The bill also authorizes the appropriation of $10 million for landmine clearing for humanitarian purposes. Prevention and Control of Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction Act. Subtitle E of the Senate bill establishes a Nonproliferation Program Review Committee, comprising the Secretaries of Defense and Energy, the Directors of Central Intelligence and ACDA, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The purpose of the Committee is "to optimize funding for, and ensure the development and deployment of (A) highly effective technologies and capabilities for the detection, monitoring, collection, processing, analysis and dissemination of information in support of United States nonproliferation policy; and (B) disabling technologies in support of such policy." The Committee will rationalize priorities and eliminate redundant R&D efforts in programs related to intelligence, battlefield detection, passive and active defenses, "counterforce," and inspection and export control supporting technologies. By 1 May 1994, the Committee is required to submit to Congress a report listing all relevant technologies which it reviewed, a description of all requirements identified by the Committee, a discussion of the short, medium and long-term programmatic options formulated by the Committee and a description of the extent to which the Secretary of Defense has incorporated nonproliferation and counter-proliferation missions into the overall missions of the unified commands. The report is to be provided in both classified and unclassified form. Sense of Congress on space and the MTCR. Included in the Senate bill is a resolution, introduced by Senators Bingaman, McCain and Glenn, expressing Congress' strong support for the strictest possible interpretation and enforcement of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) guidelines, including banning all exports of space launch vehicles and related technologies to developing countries. The language states that missile and space launch technologies are identical, and that transfers of such technologies cannot be safeguarded "in a manner that would provide timely warning of diversion for military purposes." The House later adopts this same provision in its version of the authorization bill. The provision is in response to the White House review of proliferation issues, which proposes the possibility of allowing transfers of MTCR-restricted technologies for use in space launch programs as an incentive for countries to disavow ballistic missile programs and adhere to the MTCR. Senate pushes ASAT. The Senate bill provides $10 million in unasked-for funds for the kinetic energy anti-satellite (KE ASAT) weapon. Proponents of the program cite increased access to space by developing countries and the potential proliferation of reconnaissance and other satellites as the post-Soviet justification for the program (see box), which has absorbed $225 million to date. In a compromise following an effort to delete the funds, the money was fenced until the Pentagon certifies a need for the program and provides the operational requirements document for the ASAT, called for in last year's authorization bill. In a 14 September letter, Deputy Secretary of Defense William Perry notified Chairman Nunn that the Pentagon still intends to terminate the ASAT program, because the requirement for such a weapon has "substantially reduced" and because of funding limits. Senate pushes satellites. At the same time some in the Senate insist that U.S. national security depends on being able to shoot down Third World satellites, others are working to liberalize satellite sales. At a closed hearing of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in June, Chairman Dennis DeConcini reportedly encouraged CIA Director James Woolsey to relax the CIA's opposition to the export of high resolution reconnaissance satellites and imagery. Currently, the export of satellites and photos with a resolution of better than about 10 meters are prohibited. Similarly resolute satellites are already available on the international market in the French SPOT and Russian Soyuz Karta. Using the threat of future possible sales by France and Russia of higher resolution military reconnaissance satellites under development, plus longer term German, Israeli and Chinese efforts, U.S. industry is arguing that the U.S. will lose jobs and influence if it does not permit the export now of much higher resolution satellites. At the hearing, John McMahon, president of Lockheed Mis- siles and Space Company and former Deputy Director of the CIA, testified that mining and oil exploration firms, ranchers, real estate developers provide a $5-7 billion market for photos and digital data from satellite imagery. The data are also extremely useful for verification of arms control agreements, as well as for military reconnaissance and targeting. The UAE, Spain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and Taiwan are reportedly in the market for military reconnaissance satellites (see ASM No. 18 p. 6). ____________________________________end box______________________________ Who's In, Who's Out: Arms to Nigeria Limited 30 July---The Federal Register announces that, until further notice, arms export license applications for Nigeria are being reviewed "on a more highly scrutinized case-by-case basis with a presumption of denial." The action is in response to the Nigerian military's refusal to turn over power to a civilian government elected in June. Sudan Listed as State Sponsor of Terror 12 August---The State Department adds Sudan to its official list of states sponsoring terrorism (see box). According to the Arms Export Control Act (Section 40), such countries are barred from receiving any items contained in the U.S. Munitions List, and under the terms of the Foreign Assistance Act, are barred from receiving all but the most dire humanitarian assistance. Links between the Sudanese government and the government of Iran are one of the primary concerns leading to the decision, as is Sudan's "disturbing pattern of relationships with international terrorist groups." According to State Department spokesman Mike McCurry, "The evidence currently available indicates that Sudan allows the use of its territory as sanctuary for terrorists, including the Abu Nidal organization and members of Hezbollah and Palestine Islamic Jihad." And, although this is not the primary reason for the listing, the State Department spokesman also says that Sudan has provided "material support," including weaponry, to Mohamed Farah Aideed in nearby Somalia. U.S. Invokes Missile Sanctions Against China 24 August---After nearly a year of allegations in the press (see ASM No. 19 p. 3), the State Department announces its decision that China has transferred missile technology to Pakistan which requires the re-imposition of sanctions under U.S. law (the Arms Export Control Act and Export Administration Act). "Category II" trade sanctions, less restrictive than if actual missiles had been transferred, are imposed against the Chinese Ministry of Aerospace Industry and all of its divisions, and the Pakistani Ministry of Defense. For two years U.S. companies are barred from exporting any MTCR-restricted equipment or technology to these entities, and the U.S. government cannot contract to import any missile-related items from them. In addition, because China is considered a non-market economy, the sanctions will extend to all activities of the Chinese government relating to missile production, electronics, space systems and military aircraft. This is expected to cost U.S. satellite manufacturers up to $500 million per year in lost sales. Missile sanctions were previously imposed against China Great Wall Industry Corporation and China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation (both divisions of the Ministry of Aerospace Industry) and Pakistan's Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Corporation, in July 1991. President Bush waived the trade sanctions against China in February 1991 in return for a Chinese commitment to abide by the terms of the MTCR. While the Chinese government acknowledges military ties to Pakistan, it denies violating the regime. ______________________________________box____________________________ ___________ Insight on Missile Sales The Congressional Research Service's annual report, "Conventional Arms Transfers to the Third World, 1985-1992," provides probably the most detailed source of public information on quantities of various types of weapons systems delivered to the developing world. In Table 3 of the report, transfers by weapon category are broken down by individual major suppliers to each of four developing-country regions (Middle East, Latin America, Asia/Pacific and Sub-Saharan Africa) in four year aggregate periods. Of great interest is the data for surface-to-surface missiles (SSM), defined as "all surface-to-surface missiles without regard to range, such as SCUDs and CSS-2s....exclud[ing] all anti-tank missiles and all anti-shipping missiles." According to these data, during 1985-1988 China delivered 55 SSM to the Near East. Presumably these are the long-range CSS-2s which China was revealed to have sold Saudi Arabia in March of 1988; the number of missiles transferred has never been disclosed. In the following four year period, China transferred 190 missiles to the region, the data show. Most likely these are some short-range systems to Iran, and perhaps further missiles to Saudi Arabia. During 1985-1988, the Soviet Union transferred 710 SSMs to the Near East. Iraq is the most likely recipient; the Soviet Union disclosed after Operation Desert Storm that Iraq had purchased more than 800 Scud-Bs over the years. Syria, Libya and Yemen are other possible customers during this time. By 1989 the Soviet missile transfers had stopped. "All others"---that is, other than the U.S., USSR/Russia, China, and European suppliers---delivered 400 SSMs to the Near East during the eight years covered by the report. This must be a reference to North Korea, the only "other" missile exporter during this time period. A whopping 1,655 SSMs were transferred by USSR/Russia to the Asia/Pacific region during 1989-92. None had been delivered in the prior four years. These missiles were most likely sent to the Afghan government, which reportedly fired over 1,000 missiles during the Afghan civil war. During the same time (1989-1992), the data show that China also transferred 40 SSMs to the region, presumably to Pakistan. "U.S. government" intelligence is cited as the source of the information. _________________________________end box___________________________________________ Haitian Embargo Lifted 27 August---The UN Security Council votes unanimously to suspend the arms embargo of Haiti, imposed on 16 June as part of broader economic sanctions. The sanctions were intended to force the military junta to negotiate the return of democratically elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. In a 3 July accord, brokered by the UN, the junta agreed to Aristide's return on 30 October, clearing the way for the lifting of the sanctions. DSAA Gears Up for Sales to Former Warsaw Pact 3 September---As required by law (Foreign Assistance Act Section 515(c)(2)), the Defense Security Assistance Agency sends the Foreign Affairs Committee notification that it is beefing up the arms sales office at the U.S. Embassy in Poland. Currently only one person is overseeing the program. Guyana Vital to U.S. Security 23 September---President Clinton has determined that "the furnishing, sale and/or lease of defense articles and services to the Cooperative Republic of Guyana will strengthen the security of the United States and promote world peace." Hmmm. UNITA Under UN Arms Embargo 26 September---A UN Security Council-mandated arms embargo against the UNITA rebels in Angola enters into force today, marking the first time that a non-governmental group is so targeted by the UN. The Security Council voted for the sanctions on 15 September and gave the rebel force until today to cease fighting and comply with the 1991 peace accord. Since UNITA refused, all UN members are barred from sending weapons to the rebel force. The government of Angola has been under a UN arms embargo since 1991. Deals in the Works: Notice of the following government-brokered Foreign Military Sales (FMS), export licenses for direct commercial sales from industry (DCS) and grant excess defense article transfers (EDA) was sent to Congress for approval during June-September. Some sales in June were reported in the last issue of the ASM and are not repeated here. _______________box is not reproduced here: for a copy of it, call (202) 675-1018____________________ Recent Government Publications: Arms Trade and Nonproliferation in the Middle East: Part 2 (hearing before the Technology and National Security Subcommittee of the Joint Economic Committee, 13 March 1993) U.S.GPO: 1993, 112 pp. The Bottom-Up Review: Forces for a New Era, Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, 1 September 1993, 17 pp. summary. Comparison of U.S. Administration Testimony and Reports with 1993 U.N. Truth Commission Report on El Salvador (hearings before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, July 1993), U.S.GPO: 1993, 57 pp. "Conventional Arms Transfers to the Third World, 1985-1992," CRS Report for Congress [no. 93-656F], by Richard F. Grimmett, 19 July 1993, 84 pp. The Crisis in Somalia (hearings before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, 17 December 1992 & 5 May 1993), U.S.GPO: 1993, 190 pp. Defense Conversion Programs in the President's Fiscal Year 1994 Budget Proposal (hearings before the Economic Growth and Credit Formation Subcommittee of the House Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs Committee, 19 & 22 April 1993), U.S.GPO: 1993, 258 pp. Defense Economic Conversion (hearing before the Economic Development Subcommittee of the House Public Works and Transportation Committee, 1 April 1993), U.S.GPO: 1993. Foreign Military Sales, Foreign Military Constructions Sales and Military Assistance Facts as of 30 September 1992, Defense Security Assistance Agency, August 1993, 115 pp. The Future of U.S. Foreign Policy (Part I): Regional Issues (hearings before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, 2-3, 17, 23-24 February, 18 March 1993), U.S.GPO: 1993, 494 pp.; The Future of U.S. Foreign Policy (Part II): Functional Issues (hearings on 27 January, 2-3, 10, 17 & 23 March 1993), U.S.GPO: 1993, 481 pp. Guatemala: The Prospects for Peace (hearing before the Western Hemisphere Affairs Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, 3 March 1993), U.S.GPO: August 1993. "Hidden Killers: The Global Problem with Uncleared Landmines," A Report on International Demining Prepared by the Office of International Security Operations, Department of State [as required by FY 1993 DOD Auth. Act, Section 1364]. The Impact of Defense Downsizing, Conversion, and Dual-Use Initiatives on Defense Contractors (hearing before the Economic Growth and Credit Formation Subcommittee of the House Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs Subcommittee, 10 June 1993), U.S.GPO:1993, 125 pp. Industrial Base: Impact of Defense Downsizing on Selected Abrams Tank Subcontractors (GAO/NSIAD-93-214), July 1993. "Iraq Rebuilds its Military Industries," A Staff Report Prepared by Kenneth Timmerman for the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Security, International Organizations and Human Rights, 29 June 1993. Military Aid to Egypt: Tank Coproduction Raised Costs and May Not Meet Program Goals (GAO-NSIAD-93-203), 27 July 1993. Military Sales to Israel and Egypt: DOD Needs Stronger Controls Over U.S.-Financed Procurements (GAO/NSIAD-93-184) 6 August 1993. "Nonproliferation Regimes: Policies to Control the Spread of Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Weapons and Missiles," CRS Report to Congress, March 1993, 74 pp. Peru: U.S. Priorities and Policy (hearing before the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, 10 March 1993), U.S.GPO: 1993, 78 pp. Proliferation Watch, published by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, May-June 1993, 12 pp. Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction: Assessing the Risks, Office of Technology Assessment (OTA-ISC-559), August 1993, 123 pp. "Reemploying Defense Workers: Current Experiences and Policy Alternatives," CBO Papers, Congressional Budget Office, August 1993, 48 pp. "Reform of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: A Mandate for Change," A Staff Report of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, August 1993. U.S.-Israel Arrow Program: Cost, Technical, Proliferation and Management Concerns (GAO-NSIAD-93-254). U.S. Policy Towards Burma (hearing before the Asia and the Pacific Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, 25 March 1993), U.S.GPO: 1993.