The arms race for human rights

May 25, 2012

Profits from arms deals tend to trump human rights. The United Nations Security Council, whose five veto-wielding permanent members count among the world’s biggest arms dealers, is falling down on its job. Hypocrisy is rampant as governments pay lip service to human rights.

So says Amnesty International, the London-based human rights organization, in its latest annual report, published this week. It deplores an “endemic failure of leadership” and says 2011 – the year of the Arab Spring – had made clear that “opportunistic alliances and financial interests have trumped human rights as global powers jockey for influence…”

That reference covers Russia, chief armorer of the government of Bashar al-Assad, as well as the United States, which recently resumed arms shipments to the royal rulers of tiny Bahrain, whose crackdown on dissidents has been brutal, though not nearly on the same scale as the campaign to wipe out the opposition in Syria.  The death toll there now stands at around 10,000.

To hear Amnesty Secretary General Salil Shetty tell it, the leaders who have so far failed to match human rights rhetoric with arms export deed have a chance to redeem themselves at a United Nations conference next July to work out a global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), an idea first put forward in 2003 by a group of Nobel laureates who argued that existing arms control regulations are full of loopholes.

Campaigning for an arms treaty has gathered momentum over the past few years and in a letter to U.S. President Barack Obama timed to coincide with the Amnesty International report, representatives of 51 non-governmental organizations described the July conference as an historic opportunity to prevent weapons from ending up in the hands of human rights violators. “We urge you and your administration to play a strong leadership role,” the letter said.

According to arms control experts, there are more rules and regulations governing the trade in bananas than in the trade in tanks, machine guns, sniper rifles and bullets. The lack of common international standards, the argument goes, results in the deaths of  thousands of  civilians every year at the hand of dictatorial governments, criminals and terrorists.

The existing framework of arms embargoes is not bullet-proof, so to say. According to the relief organization Oxfam, which has taken a prominent role in advocating for the ATT, countries under arms embargoes imported more than $2.2 billion worth of arms and ammunition since the year 2000. Case in point: Darfur. It has been under an arms embargo imposed by the U.N. Security Council in 2004 but weapons from Belarus, China and Russia continue to flow despite large-scale human rights violations.


Given the long history of questionable arms deals, a dose of skepticism is in order about the prospect of a treaty that would change a world in which one man’s rights-trampling government is another man’s valuable ally. Case in point: Bahrain.

On May 11, the U.S. State Department said it would end a freeze on military sales to the island state – imposed in September in response to a violent crackdown on dissidents – because of “a determination that it is in the U.S. national interest to let these things go forward,” in the words of an official who briefed reporters. He did not need to explain the nature of the national interest — Bahrain is home to the U.S. Fifth Fleet, there to guard shipping lanes that carry around 40 percent of the world’s tanker-born oil.

National interest trumps human rights concerns. That is as true for the United States, the world’s largest arms manufacturer and exporter, as it is for other arms exporters. Russia, number two in  the arms exporters’ ranking, does not cite “national interest” for shipping weapons to Syria, it just refers to compliance with commercial contracts. But its naval base at the Syrian port of Tartus, Moscow’s only outpost in the Mediterranean, clearly plays a role.

While proponents of a treaty sound optimistic about the possibility of all 193 members of the United Nations agreeing on new regulations, they also say there are different approaches that have yet to be reconciled. One would require that countries “shall not” transfer weapons to recipients who might use them to violate human rights or humanitarian law.

“Without that ‘shall not’ requirement, the treaty would be ineffective,” says Oxfam’s Scott Stedjan. The second approach under discussion as experts prepare for the July conference would require signatories to “take into account” potential risks associated with an arms deal. That’s a loophole big enough to drive a tank through.

In April, the State Department’s point man on the proposed treaty, Thomas Countryman, put things into perspective at a panel discussion arranged by a Washington think tank. Even an effective treaty, he said, “will not fundamentally change the nature of international politics nor can it by itself bring an end to the festering international and civil conflicts around the world.”

PHOTO: An Ardha (Bahraini folk dance) dancer rests with his gold gun as he chats with his colleagues at the Bahrain Heritage Festival inaguratedin Manama, April 30, 2003. REUTERS/Hamad I Mohammed


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

Over long article with little of value.

Human rights is a made up term to get people to buy into some nonsense. There will always be arms dealers. There will always be people suffering. The way of the world.

If people want a change in their situation, then THEY have to take action. If they do not take action, then they will continue to suffer.

Censorship is evil.

Posted by ALLSOLUTIONS | Report as abusive

I think ALLSOLUTIONS just endorsed terrorism.

Posted by notnews | Report as abusive

It should be obvious. Money is more important than people. Who could have thought otherwise?

Posted by Pelikaan | Report as abusive

“Human Rights” a term generated in “Western Democracies,” to cover citizen’s rights.
However, as we all know “gold speaks all languages, opens all doors.”
And nothing is more profitable than selling arms.

Posted by The1eyedman | Report as abusive

[…] The arms race for human rights […]

Posted by इदं न मम – Syria, Seriously | Report as abusive

[…] The arms race for human rights […]

Posted by हिन्दू तर्क शास्त्रद्न्य सिद्धार्थ – Syria, Seriously | Report as abusive

Mr Shetty was interviewed on the BBC News Channel. He admitted – almost in terms, thanks to a skilful interviewer – that he would have no problem with the Security Council provided that in every case it agreed with him as to which regimes needed replacing and which preserving.

Human rights are not an objective phenomenon. Since they are a legal construct created by fallible and interested humans, the question is whether their limits are to be determined democratically, by our delegates and representatives in the halls of the UN, or by a single unelected and unaccountable activist. In the long run, the first would appear to be preferable: at least the mistakes will be more carefully examined.

Posted by IanKemmish | Report as abusive

[…] The arms race for human rights Tech » Media » iPad » […]

Posted by Acer says no plans to launch non-tablet devices on ARM | Try2connect News Blog | Report as abusive

The Ships’s Voyages…

I feel technology just causes it to be worse. Now there is a channel to never ever care, now there wouldn’t be a opportunity for them to discover….

Posted by Prince Faul | Report as abusive

Thorn of Girl…

Very good data can be discovered on this net weblog….

Posted by Lesley Goede | Report as abusive

Woman of Alien…

Fantastic function you’ve done, this site is absolutely interesting with amazing info. Time is God’s strategy for holding anything from happening directly….

Posted by Kermit Reever | Report as abusive

I want to exhibit due to you regarding saving me from this form of circumstance. Soon after evaluating the internet as well as getting together with methods wasn’t beneficial, I thought playing ended up being more than. Current lacking typically the ways to the difficulties you’ve categorized available through your content pages is often a crucial circumstance, as well as ones that could include in a negative way damaged my whole profession basically had not came across your website. Your genuine comprehending and also benevolence in holding every aspect ended up being precious. My spouse and i need ideas the things i would have carried out only hadn’t come about this type of place such as this. I’m also able to during this period relish our foreseeable future. Thanks a whole lot on your specialist as well as useful assist. I will not be reluctant to recommend the website to every individual who will be required direction regarding this challenge.

Posted by Byron Lisi | Report as abusive