On Tuesday [15 Oct 2013], the largest deregulation in the history of U.S. arms exports took place as part of the Barack Obama administration\u2019s export reform initiative.<\/p>\n
But a day after the new reforms came into effect, former government officials and critics from the human rights community are warning of the serious human rights consequences and of the negative long-term impact for U.S. foreign policy.<\/p>\n
The reforms are part of the Export Control Reform Initiative<\/a> (ECRI) brought forward by the Obama administration in 2010, with the goal of simplifying U.S. export practices by eliminating redundant restrictions and regulations.<\/p>\n The most problematic aspect of the reforms is the extensive deregulation of military exports by categorising them as \u2018dual-use\u2019 goods, which currently face no trade restrictions under international commercial law.<\/p>\n But according to critics, this large deregulation of armaments trade will have serious long-term consequences for U.S. military strategy and for human rights abuses across the globe.<\/p>\n The arms export reforms will transfer the oversight of military export items from the U.S. Department of State to the U.S. Department of Commerce. This change will only increase the risks connected with arms exports, critics say.<\/p>\n \u201cUnlike standard armaments, dual-use goods currently face little or no restriction because they\u2019ve always been considered normal commercial goods,\u201d said William J. Lowell, a former U.S. State Department official and now the managing director of Lowell Defense Trade, a national security consulting firm here.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat this deregulation does is move as much as 75 percent of our arms exports to the Commerce Department, with no regulation,\u201d Lowell told IPS.<\/p>\n No regulation<\/b><\/p>\n The military items that will move to Commerce Department oversight are primarily small parts such as aircraft components, electronic equipment, night vision equipment, and automatic firearms.<\/p>\n But these are the items that will inevitably threaten U.S. military strategy, critics suggest.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen you allow these items to be traded with no restrictions and no licensing, you\u2019re basically allowing places like China and Iran to obtain our military technology and our spare parts with no restrictions whatsoever,\u201d Steven W. Pelak, a former U.S. Justice Department official and now a partner at Holland & Hart, an international law firm, said here on Wednesday. \u201cIn the long-term, this can put American lives at risk.\u201d<\/p>\n And while some emphasise the potential backfiring effect of the new deregulation on U.S. interests, others highlight the damaging effect the reforms will have on the international arms export regime.<\/p>\n Since World War II, the U.S. has been in the forefront in urging other countries to control conventional arms more closely, Lowell says.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re the world\u2019s largest arms provider. And now we\u2019re basically retreating from our leadership,\u201d he told IPS. \u201cThis means that other countries, like Russia, will be only too happy to agree with decontrolling some of their international arms transfers.\u201d<\/p>\n Human rights abuses <\/b><\/p>\n And as critics consider the implications for U.S. foreign policy and military stability in troublesome areas around the world, human rights advocates warn of the human rights abuses that are going to take place after the deregulation.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re seriously concerned that the reforms will open a floodgate of weapons technology and equipment to governments that have bad human rights records,\u201d Adotei Akwei, the managing director for government relations at Amnesty International USA<\/a>, a global human rights movement, told IPS. \u201cThis could further facilitate the commission of human rights abuses around the world.\u201d<\/p>\n Indeed, according to a recent report<\/a> by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Russia, the second-largest arms exporter after the U.S., has provided Algeria, where human rights records are troublesome, with over 90 percent the country\u2019s armaments between 2008 and 2012.<\/p>\n The trend may spread to other problematic spots, including Sub-Saharan Africa. In early 2012, Sierra Leone\u2019s People\u2019s Party raised concerns over large imports of small weapons and ammunition from China, as it feared the weapons could be used to persecute political opponents in the upcoming elections, the SIPRI reports.<\/p>\n Human rights activists fear that these types of scenarios will only increase after the extensive export deregulation measures took effect on Tuesday.<\/p>\n \u201cWe in the human rights community have been fighting for the past 30 years to try to bring more oversight and regulation to the global trade in arms because of the link with human rights violations such as killings, displacement of population, and torture,\u201d Amnesty International USA\u2019s Akwei told IPS. \u201cAnd now we see the U.S. stepping back from these commitments. It is extremely alarming.\u201d<\/p>\n Unclear motives<\/b><\/p>\n It is still unclear why the U.S. administration has opted for this arms export deregulation, the largest and most comprehensive in the country\u2019s history.<\/p>\n The shift from the State to the Commerce Department also comes with a change in the definition of what constitutes a \u201cmilitary item.\u201d Before the reforms, the U.S. State Department maintained jurisdiction and control over all items on the U.S. Munitions List, the list containing all military-related items requiring an export license prior to being shipped to foreign countries.<\/p>\n