Export Controls: Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Technologies

P. Sullivan
{"title":"Export Controls: Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Technologies","authors":"P. Sullivan","doi":"10.21236/ada385720","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Conclusions * In December 1995, in The Hague suburb of Wassenaar, the United States and its allies and former adversaries, including Russia, agreed to establish an export control arrangement to deal with post-Cold War security risks arising from transfers of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies. The objective is to promote greater transparency and responsibility and as well as restraint in such transfers. * At their Dec. 13, 1996 meeting the 33 member states of the Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) noted that they have now begun work on the basis of the Ainitial elements,\" the WA's principles and procedures, which were agreed to in July. * Although WA members have national policies against selling arms or sensitive dual-use items for military end-uses in \"states of serious concern,\" key members oppose measures that would diminish their freedom of action. Thus the WA does not formally identify the \"states of serious concern\" (Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Libya). Furthermore, the requirements to exchange information on transfers to non-members are limited in scope and timeliness. Most importantly, the WA failed to secure agreement on notification prior to transferring arms to regions of instability (Middle East and South Asia) or on disclosure of dual-use transfers to purported civilian end-users in states of concern. Thus, the WA lacks the tools needed to meaningfully implement its objectives. Origins At the 1993 Vancouver summit meeting, President Boris Yelstin complained to President Bill Clinton that the Coordinating Committee on Export Controls (COCOM) was a \"relic of the Cold War.\" (Formed in 1949, COCOM consisted of NATO, Japan and Australia. The members agreed to prevent exports of militarily significant, including dual-use, technology to Commu-nist countries.) Promising a fresh appraisal, Clinton also pressed Yeltsin to cooperate with U.S. export control efforts, including stopping Russia's arms transfers to Iran. This led to COCOM's termination in March 1994, Russia's agreement not to enter new arms sales contracts with Iran, and it culminated in the multilateral Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) agreements in December 1995 and July 1996. The agreement to establish the WA, based in Vienna, was concluded after extended and contentious bilateral and multilateral negotiations. The result is a bare bones framework espousing the high-minded principles, but little of the muscle, sought by United States. However, at U.S. insistence, the initial guidelines are subject to further elaboration and definition. The WA may follow the pattern set by the nonproliferation export control regimes which were born under similar modest circumstances, but have since grown incrementally (albeit with much room for additional improvement). As with those regimes, the key ingredient for growth will be continued U.S. leadership. The Initial Elements On the positive side, the WA is the first global mechanism for controlling transfers of conventional arms and related (including dual-use) technologies and promoting greater transparency and responsibility in transfers of these items to \"prevent destabilizing accumulations.\" The WA has a Munitions List and Dual-Use List of controlled goods and technologies that borrow from COCOM's control lists and serve as the basis of participants' national control systems to prevent unauthorized transfers and re-transfers. The WA is intended to complement and reinforce non-proliferation regimes, without duplication. It does so in at least three ways: First, by covering goods and technologies that, for the most part, are not covered by other regimes; second, by requiring that members adhere to those regimes and to other non-proliferation norms; and, third, by requiring members to establish effective export controls on items covered by nonproliferation regimes, as well as those on the WA's lists. The WA does not have a COCOM-style proscribed countries list-indeed, targeting specific states or groups of states is expressly disclaimed. …","PeriodicalId":165909,"journal":{"name":"National Defense University. Institute for National Strategic Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National Defense University. Institute for National Strategic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21236/ada385720","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Conclusions * In December 1995, in The Hague suburb of Wassenaar, the United States and its allies and former adversaries, including Russia, agreed to establish an export control arrangement to deal with post-Cold War security risks arising from transfers of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies. The objective is to promote greater transparency and responsibility and as well as restraint in such transfers. * At their Dec. 13, 1996 meeting the 33 member states of the Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) noted that they have now begun work on the basis of the Ainitial elements," the WA's principles and procedures, which were agreed to in July. * Although WA members have national policies against selling arms or sensitive dual-use items for military end-uses in "states of serious concern," key members oppose measures that would diminish their freedom of action. Thus the WA does not formally identify the "states of serious concern" (Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Libya). Furthermore, the requirements to exchange information on transfers to non-members are limited in scope and timeliness. Most importantly, the WA failed to secure agreement on notification prior to transferring arms to regions of instability (Middle East and South Asia) or on disclosure of dual-use transfers to purported civilian end-users in states of concern. Thus, the WA lacks the tools needed to meaningfully implement its objectives. Origins At the 1993 Vancouver summit meeting, President Boris Yelstin complained to President Bill Clinton that the Coordinating Committee on Export Controls (COCOM) was a "relic of the Cold War." (Formed in 1949, COCOM consisted of NATO, Japan and Australia. The members agreed to prevent exports of militarily significant, including dual-use, technology to Commu-nist countries.) Promising a fresh appraisal, Clinton also pressed Yeltsin to cooperate with U.S. export control efforts, including stopping Russia's arms transfers to Iran. This led to COCOM's termination in March 1994, Russia's agreement not to enter new arms sales contracts with Iran, and it culminated in the multilateral Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) agreements in December 1995 and July 1996. The agreement to establish the WA, based in Vienna, was concluded after extended and contentious bilateral and multilateral negotiations. The result is a bare bones framework espousing the high-minded principles, but little of the muscle, sought by United States. However, at U.S. insistence, the initial guidelines are subject to further elaboration and definition. The WA may follow the pattern set by the nonproliferation export control regimes which were born under similar modest circumstances, but have since grown incrementally (albeit with much room for additional improvement). As with those regimes, the key ingredient for growth will be continued U.S. leadership. The Initial Elements On the positive side, the WA is the first global mechanism for controlling transfers of conventional arms and related (including dual-use) technologies and promoting greater transparency and responsibility in transfers of these items to "prevent destabilizing accumulations." The WA has a Munitions List and Dual-Use List of controlled goods and technologies that borrow from COCOM's control lists and serve as the basis of participants' national control systems to prevent unauthorized transfers and re-transfers. The WA is intended to complement and reinforce non-proliferation regimes, without duplication. It does so in at least three ways: First, by covering goods and technologies that, for the most part, are not covered by other regimes; second, by requiring that members adhere to those regimes and to other non-proliferation norms; and, third, by requiring members to establish effective export controls on items covered by nonproliferation regimes, as well as those on the WA's lists. The WA does not have a COCOM-style proscribed countries list-indeed, targeting specific states or groups of states is expressly disclaimed. …
出口管制:常规武器和两用技术
1995年12月,在海牙郊区瓦森纳尔,美国及其盟国和包括俄罗斯在内的前对手同意建立一项出口管制安排,以处理常规武器和双重用途货物和技术转让所引起的冷战后安全风险。其目标是促进这种转让的更大透明度和责任以及限制。*在1996年12月13日的会议上,33个瓦森纳安排(WA)成员国指出,他们现在已经开始在“瓦森纳安排的基本要素”的基础上开展工作,“瓦森纳安排”的原则和程序于7月达成一致。*虽然佤联军成员有反对向“严重关切国家”出售武器或敏感的军民两用物品的国家政策,但主要成员反对采取可能削弱其行动自由的措施。因此,《华盛顿宣言》没有正式确定“严重关切国”(伊朗、伊拉克、朝鲜和利比亚)。此外,要求交换向非成员国转让的资料在范围和时效性上是有限的。最重要的是,《世界武器协定》未能就向不稳定地区(中东和南亚)转让武器之前的通知达成协议,也未能就向有关国家的所谓民用最终用户披露军民两用转让达成协议。因此,WA缺乏有意义地实现其目标所需的工具。在1993年温哥华峰会上,鲍里斯·叶利钦总统向比尔·克林顿总统抱怨说,出口管制协调委员会(COCOM)是“冷战的遗物”。(COCOM成立于1949年,由北约、日本和澳大利亚组成。成员国同意防止向共产主义国家出口重要的军事技术,包括军民两用技术。)克林顿承诺进行新的评估,并敦促叶利钦配合美国的出口管制努力,包括阻止俄罗斯向伊朗转让武器。这导致COCOM在1994年3月终止,俄罗斯同意不与伊朗签订新的武器销售合同,并在1995年12月和1996年7月的多边瓦森纳尔安排(WA)协议中达到高潮。在维也纳建立世界卫生组织的协议,是经过长期和有争议的双边和多边谈判后达成的。其结果是一个支持高尚原则的框架,但缺乏美国所寻求的力量。然而,在美国的坚持下,最初的指导方针有待进一步的阐述和定义。《世界贸易协定》可能会遵循防扩散出口管制机制所设定的模式,这些机制是在类似的温和环境下诞生的,但后来逐渐发展起来(尽管还有很大的改进空间)。与那些政权一样,经济增长的关键因素将是美国继续发挥领导作用。从积极的方面来看,《世界武器协定》是第一个控制常规武器及相关(包括两用)技术转让的全球机制,并促进这些项目转让的透明度和责任,以“防止不稳定的积累”。《军需物品清单》和《受管制物品和技术双重用途清单》借鉴了COCOM的管制清单,并作为参加国国家管制系统的基础,以防止未经授权的转让和再转让。《工作宣言》的目的是补充和加强不扩散制度,没有重复。它至少通过三种方式做到了这一点:首先,它涵盖了其他制度在很大程度上不涵盖的商品和技术;第二,要求成员国遵守这些制度和其他不扩散准则;第三,要求成员国对防扩散机制所涵盖的项目以及《世界武器清单》上的项目建立有效的出口管制。《世界军事宣言》并没有cocom式的被禁国家名单——事实上,明确否认针对特定国家或国家集团。...
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信