EU members agree to curb weapons sales

By David Cronin

Date: 09/12/04

New rules on curbing the use of EU-made weapons by war criminals have been agreed by member states.

Following campaigning by charities such as the Red Cross, EU diplomats have decided that the provisions in the 1998 code of conduct on arms exports should be strengthened.

In its present form, the code makes what aid workers deem an ambiguous reference to the need to take international humanitarian law into account when considering licences for arms sales. A revamped code would make that more explicit by stating that EU governments will not issue export licenses if there is a clear risk of the Geneva Conventions being violated.

The new provisions are part of a series of amendments approved by the working group dealing with the code at the Council of Ministers last Friday (3 December).

But EU diplomats say the changes will probably not be adopted by foreign ministers until the New Year.

The main hurdle to be overcome is to make the code compatible with member states' laws on arms exports.

While designed to prevent arms sales from the EU contributing to human rights abuses or exacerbating regional tensions, its effectiveness has been widely questioned.

The latest annual report on the code's application, prepared by the Council of Ministers, showed that large quantities of military products were being sold to countries where conflict or internal repression is rife.

Even though China has been subject to an arms embargo since the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, the report shows that military export licences worth €461 million were concluded between EU countries and the Beijing authorities in 2003.

France, Germany, the Czech Republic and the UK accounted for these sales.

The report shows that €230m worth of military goods went to Israel, despite the international condemnation of its activities in the occupied territories. Almost €17m of arms sales were concluded with Colombia, despite its intense political violence, and €47.5m of weapons were shipped to Russia, in spite of the conflict in Chechnya.

Last month, the European Parliament called for the code to be made legally binding. But diplomats say there is no consensus among EU governments to take that step. Amnesty International spokesman Dick Oosting said that he would welcome more explicit language in the code on humanitarian law but that it would still be a "weak instrument".

"The experience in five years of its use shows there are too many flaws," he added. "It needs strengthening by being made legally binding and by plugging certain loopholes."

A report published by conflict prevention advocates Saferworld in September criticized member states for not introducing sufficient controls on arms-brokering activities conducted by their nationals outside the EU's territory.

Saferworld campaigner Roy Isbister said that insufficient attention was being paid to re-export controls. This was necessary, he added, as British-equipped F-16s had been used in attacks against Palestinian civilians over the past few years. Components for the jets were sold to the US and then re-exported to Israel.

Catalan Green MEP Raül Romeva, who drafted the Parliament report on the code of conduct, warns that the quality of data on arms exports is not consistent across the EU.

Greater assistance should be given to the new member states which joined the Union in May so that they can improve their statistics, he said.

A Council working group has approved new rules on curbing the use of EU-made weapons by war criminals, 3 December 2004. The code of conduct relating to licences on arms exports, originally agreed in 1998, has been strengthened, so that licences must not be issued if there is a clear risk of the Geneva Convention being violated.