{"id":2801,"date":"2021-09-14T11:13:12","date_gmt":"2021-09-14T11:13:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.declassifieduk.org\/?p=2801"},"modified":"2022-03-01T21:19:38","modified_gmt":"2022-03-01T21:19:38","slug":"britains-robust-arms-export-controls-are-a-fiction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.declassifieduk.org\/britains-robust-arms-export-controls-are-a-fiction\/","title":{"rendered":"Britain\u2019s \u201crobust\u201d arms export controls are a fiction"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
Britain exported over \u00a311-billion worth of arms around the world in 2019 but UK ministers claim this trade is properly administered in a mantra that goes <\/a>like this<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cHM Government takes its export control responsibilities very seriously and operates one of the most robust arms export control regimes in the world. We consider all export applications thoroughly against a strict risk assessment framework and keep all licences under careful and continual review as standard.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n It adds: \u201cHM Government will not grant an export licence if to do so would be inconsistent with the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These contentions are not true and the stark, unavoidable reality is that the British government and its weapons manufacturers, between whom there is a symbiotic relationship, repeatedly violate domestic law and international agreements on arms controls with no repercussions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The British arms industry, politicians, the military and intelligence services can all essentially do what they want, with limited scrutiny and virtually no accountability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under its official arms export <\/a>criteria<\/a>, the UK is not meant to grant a licence \u201cif there is a clear risk that the items might be used for internal repression\u201d. Yet the UK routinely exports military equipment to human rights-abusing states where UK equipment might be used for such repression, such as Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and many others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Neither is the UK meant to \u201cgrant a licence if there is a clear risk that the items might be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law\u201d. However, for the past six years, the UK has armed Saudi Arabia during its war in Yemen which has seen significant<\/a> breaches<\/a> of international humanitarian law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The UK applies no blanket ban on supplying arms to dictatorships, human rights abusers or countries at war. Ministers themselves simply interpret the \u201ccriteria\u201d to decide if recipients \u201cmight\u201d use British equipment for nefarious purposes and usually decide that they won\u2019t.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The \u201cend use\u201d of such equipment is then not monitored by the British government, meaning recipient states are free to use that equipment as they like.<\/p>\n\n\n\n