From: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu (Rich Winkel)
Subject: Western Economies Propped Up by Arms Trade
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 09:15:23 GMT

/** mideast.gulf: 25.0 **/
** Topic: IPS/MIDDLE EAST/NOVEMBER 1992 **
** Written 10:44 pm  Nov 16, 1992 by pnmideast in cdp:mideast.gulf **
From: <pnmideast>
Subject: IPS/MIDDLE EAST/NOVEMBER 1992

/* Written 12:09 am  Nov 16, 1992 by newsdesk@igc.apc.org in igc:ips.englibrary */
/* ---------- "MIDDLE EAST: Arms trade has long pr" ---------- */
Copyright Inter Press Service 1992, all rights reserved.  Permission to re-
print within 7 days of original date only with permission from 'newsdesk'.

Area: Europe, western
Title: MIDDLE EAST: Arms trade has long propped up western economies

an inter press service feature

by john roberts

edinburgh, nov 13 (ips) -- every day there are new revelations
from london, washington, rome or some other western capital
concerning the way in which the west built up the arms industries
of iraq and iran during the gulf war.

in london, the case against one businessman whose company
provided machine tools for the iraqi defence industry was dropped;
in washington documents were published showing that another
british businessman had provided information to u.s. intelligence
on iraq; and in rome it was reported that a major italian bank was
reopening its investigation into five billion dollars worth of
illegal loans to baghdad.

these stories, emerging at a time of economic recession in the
industrialised world, are usually taken as indications of the
ruthless methods that western governments and companies were
prepared to take to secure arms exports to wealthy oil producing
companies.

this certainly was the stance adopted by keith bailey, a senior
executive of britain's bse tools, who was prosecuted by customs
for selling arms manufacturing equipment to iraq in contravention
of a british embargo, but against whom the case was dropped on
thursday.

the case collapsed, as did a similar trial of executives of the
matrix churchill company, because it was disclosed that such
exports had in fact been promoted by the government, even though
they appeared to violate the government's own export restrictions.

''i feel sorry for the government,'' said bailey. ''they were
seeking to promote trade, just like every other government in
europe.'' it was important to remember, he added, that iraq was
''a country with the second largest oil reserves in the world and
wants to do business'' with the west.

this was certainly true. a british minister at the time of these
arms sales, alan clark, has stated publicly that government's
policy was indeed to encourage such sales because of the
beneficial effect on british exports.

the standard works on arms sales to the region, notably the
bulletins put out by the u.s. arms control and disarmament agency
and the publications of the stockholm international peace research
institute, routinely show the vast levels of armaments purchased
by the big weapons-importing countries of the middle east.
(more/ips)

middle east: arms trade has long propped up western economies(2)

middle east: arms (2)

during the eight years of the iran-iraq war, the combatants
between them imported more than 80 billion dollars worth of
weapons. much of this was identifiable weaponry provided by a
small group of suppliers, notably the soviet union, france and
china.

but these sources were not able to quantify the value of the
industrial exports from other countries -- notably britain, west
germany, italy and the united states -- which enabled iraq in
particular to make rapid progress in developing its own arms
manufacturing industry.

no less than five billion dollars in funding for such imports
came from italy's banca nazionale de lavoro, through its branch in
atlanta, georgia, which for some years had been deeply involved in
providing u.s. government credit guarantees for use by iraq to
purchase u.s. food imports.

in britain, where such exports certainly totalled hundreds of
millions of dollars -- the figure may even be in the billions --
the value was stressed in terms of jobs. as a result of the
termination of its iraqi business following its investigation by
british customs, bse had to shed 300 jobs.

when matrix churchill, which with government knowledge had
actually been taken over by the iraqis, was forced to close, it
cost britain 1,800 jobs.

yet this is not the whole story. for most western countries the
push to arm iraq began in 1985, and became intense in 1986 when
there was a serious possibility that iranian forces would break
through the iraqi defences and push forward into kuwait and the
gulf or even towards jordan and israel.

the u.s. government, under president reagan, began liberalising
export policy to iraq by lifting restrictions on dual use
equipment -- material that could be used to make either military
or civilian products. it also considered lifting restrictions on
supply of u.s. origin military equipment by other countries,
notably from egypt, to iraq.

u.s. officials said at the time they feared an iranian victory
more than an iraqi triumph. there was a positive ''tilt'' towards
baghdad which lasted until the invasion of kuwait in august 1990.

two weeks before the invasion, britain approved the sale of arms
manufacturing equipment to iraq and on aug 1, less than 24 hours
before the invasion took place, president bush blocked a move by
the u.s. house of representatives to impose tighter sanctions on
iraq for its use of chemical weapons in suppressing its own
kurdish people.(more/ips)

middle east: arms trade has long propped up western economies(3-e)

middle east: arms (3)

in the next few months, as the new bill clinton administration
takes over in washington, one of the key questions will be whether
it presses ahead with the existing congressional inquiries into
the provision of u.s. credits and equipment for iraq. the british
government has just announced the appointment of a senior judge to
investigate the same subject in britain.

but perhaps the most interesting facet to watch will be whether
either country seeks to bolster or weaken the role of its customs
department. in both countries, the customs departments have been
highly active in tackling potential breaches of international arms
embargoes, even in cases where there seemed to be government
clearance for such sales.

often they have found their prosecutions blocked or thwarted by
other government departments. in britain, there are now calls from
members of the ruling conservative party for a curtailing of the
right of the customs and excise department to bring prosecutions
of this kind without first presenting them to the government's own
director of public prosecutions.

whether the authorities in washington and london enhance or
curtail the independence of their respective customs authorities,
may well provide the best indication as to how far they intend to
go in the future to honour existing international commitments to
restrain the flow of arms to developing countries, in general, and
to the middle east in particular.(end/ips/ip/jmr/cpg/92)

** End of text from cdp:mideast.gulf **
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive