Summary

Since 1995 the level of transfers of major conventional weapons has been fairly stable and much lower than in the late 1980s. The global SIPRI trend-indicator value of the transfers of major conventional weapons in 1998 - $21.9 billion, at constant 1990 prices - was little more than in 1994 ($20 billion), the lowest level since 1970. The global reduction in 1998 was primarily the result of procurement decisions made several years ago, rather than an effect of the financial crisis which began in Asia in 1997.

There were only minor changes in the ranking of the top major suppliers for the aggregate period 1994-98 compared with the period 1993-97. The USA remained the largest supplier in 1994-98, followed by Russia. Among the other major suppliers France's arms transfers have increased steadily since 1994; France passed the UK to become the third largest supplier for the period 1994-1998. 

Against the background of tough global and regional competition, industrial and political ambitions to finance the development of new weapons and certain arms production capacities by way of arms exports lead to different national interpretations of export limitations and technology transfers to the possible detriment of arms control. This was illustrated in 1998 by the failed attempt by the US Administration to prevent the British Government from approving the sale of air-to-ground missiles to the United Arab Emirates.

Among different means of arms export control, embargoes are a strong political signal of disfavour. While many embargoes have been enforced on states engaged in internal wars, they do not seem to have had much influence on the level of violence or to have led to an end to the fighting. In practically all cases of embargo, including mandatory UN embargoes, reports have emerged of illegal arms transfers. 

The adoption by EU member states of a Code of Conduct for Arms Exports in 1998 constitutes an important step in a difficult political process towards the creation of common export regulations. However, the code does not put restrictions on European arms exports. It remains to be seen if the first annual reports on arms exports and on the national implementation of the code will be a major step forward with regard to transparency. On the whole, there are still few governments which regularly make available detailed national information about their overall arms exports, although the level of detail has improved in recent years. In 1998 the UN Register of Conventional Arms included data (for 1997) on holdings of weapons and procurement from national production for the first time.

Appendix 11A. The volume of transfers of major conventional weapons, 1989-98

BJÖRN HAGELIN, PIETER D. WEZEMAN AND SIMON T. WEZEMAN

Appendix 11B. Register of the transfers and licensed production of major conventional weapons, 1998

BJÖRN HAGELIN, PIETER D. WEZEMAN AND SIMON T. WEZEMAN

Appendix 11C. Sources and methods

Appendix 11D. The European Union Code of Conduct for Arms Exports

Appendix 11E. Efforts to control the international trade in light weapons

BERNARD ADAM

Summary

The success of the campaign to ban anti-personnel landmines gave some encouragement to the non-governmental organizations, international bodies and some national governments that were seeking improved control of light weapons, but progress was limited to some particular steps. Because of lack of support from member states, initial action by the UN on the 1997 report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Small Arms was limited to the initiation of a study on ammunition and preparations for an international conference. Regional initiatives included the adoption by the EU of a Code of Conduct on Arms Exports and a Joint Action to combat the spread of small arms; the Organization of American States (OAS) legally binding Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Material (1997); and a Declaration of a Moratorium on Importation, Exportation and Manufacture of Light Weapons in West Africa by the 16 member states of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Cooperation developed at a practical level in southern Africa.

The fight against arms trafficking depends on the support of national governments and will need strong political will. Support for controls on the 'supply' as well as the 'demand' side is patchy, particularly among the industrialized states, and lack of coordination between national governments is a particular problem in Europe. The next steps in pushing ahead restraints on light weapons transfers are likely to be the introduction of greater transparency (either by including light weapons in the UN Register of Conventional Weapons or by creating regional registers) and an international system of supplier identification and marking.