Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Arms traders find blind eye is best defence

Military markets: Try as they might to avoid it, firms selling weapons of war still face moral dilemma

Richard Lloyd Parry Singapore
Friday 09 May 1997 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

In Singapore last week, just as during the Gulf War, it was clear that for all the bad press they have received over the years, mines, missiles and other bringers of death all have their own distinct personalities.

At the International Maritime Defence Exhibition (Imdex Asia '97) which ended yesterday, there were no evil Scuds or plucky little Patriots, but the glossy magazines and audio-visual displays mounted by the 300 defence manufacturers introduced a whole range of less famous personalities.

Among helicopters there was the Boeing Chinook ("a versatile warhorse that won't take no for an answer") and the Saab ASW-601 grenade launcher or, as its manufacturers nickname it, the "Submarine Slayer". Rather more mystifying to the layman was the gaily named Hellfire II Missile System.

The most radical attempt to humanise a piece of military equipment came from the manufacturers of an ingenious artillery shell which explodes before impact to release a shower of deadly tungsten pellets.

A piece of metal which had been subjected to this ordeal was displayed and, as I peered through the holes in the inch-thick steel and wondered aloud at the effect this might have on a human target, an attendant approached. "When you write about this," he said, "don't make it sound too ... illiberal."

"Lethal ordnance with a liberal conscience" would make a fine advertising slogan, but there was a serious significance to Mr Tungsten's anxiety. Despite the eclipse of mass peace movements and the huge economic benefits it brings to countries including Britain, moral questions still hover over the business of "defence sales".

For European exporters one of the most lucrative markets has been the Middle East, a political and diplomatic minefield, as the arms to Iraq scandal demonstrated. But exhibitors at Imdex, the biggest fair of its kind in the region, were in no doubt that the future of arms exports lie in the Far East.

"Asia is going to be the biggest defence market in the world in 20 or 25 years," says David Saw, editor of the Asian Military Review. "It has the money, and it has the need."

It also has unsavoury regimes whose potential use of foreign-manufactured arms is a source of fluctuating embarrassment to governments and their defence manufacturers.

The problem of to whom it is appropriate to sell arms is not simply a moral one. Countries have strategic interests to protect and dense bureaucratic procedures surround the export of defence equipment.

British companies need government permission before sending even promotional material abroad, and approval for particular projects will pass through several ministries, including Defence, Trade and Industry, and the Foreign Office.

Certain countries, such as Burma, are the subject of a blanket ban. From Indonesia the Government has obtained a promise that British equipment will not be used to suppress civilian protests. "Do we feel the pinch on export licenses?" asks Rear-Admiral Sam Salt of the MoD Defence Export Services Organisation. "We have a very responsible attitude to export licences, and we do find that very restrictive."

British companies complain that the rules mean they lose out to rivals from less conscientious countries. But most of those showing in Singapore were grateful the moral burden had been lifted from their shoulders. "It's not a decision we make," says Christopher Loney of GKN Westland, "and it's not one we are capable of making. In deciding who we sell to, we look to the Government. At the corporate level there aren't really any moral judgements."

But companies are keen avoid the taint of association with questionable regimes. With the demise of the Soviet bogey, liberal concern has centred on lesser regimes whose misdeeds might once have been overlooked. According to Admiral Salt, "the lobby groups are getting more vociferous".

This was demonstrated last summer when a group of peace campaigners were acquitted by a jury in Liverpool despite admitting they vandalised British Aerospace Hawk fighters bound for Indonesia; uncorroborated reports say Hawks have been used against independence fighters in the occupied territory of East Timor.

The rumour is that the new Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, intends to clamp down on arms trade with Indonesia.

The 82 British companies exhibiting in Singapore last week were keen to establish the liberal credentials of their hardware. "We're just not in the mainstream of suppression instruments", one helicopter manufacturer protested.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in