FAS Homepage | Arms Sales | Arms Sales Monitor | Index | Search | Join FAS

No. 20 (30 April 1993)

In this issue:

[N]o security assistance may be provided to any country the government of which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of international- ly recognized human rights.---Section 502B of the Foreign Assistance Act Respect for the dignity of the human being is no less vital to international stability and security than respect for the integrity of borders....Under the Clinton Administration, human rights considerations will be fully integrated into our foreign policy decisions....We will actively encourage trends toward open, informed, tolerant, law-based, civil societies around the globe, and we will target our foreign assistance accordingly.---Sec. of State Christopher, 1 April

President Clinton and, more recently, Secretary of State Warren Christopher have repeatedly asserted that attention to human rights and democratic governance is a central tenet of this administration's foreign policy.

Several positions have been created in the State and Defense Departments, ostensibly to make good on this pledge: former Senator Tim Wirth will be the new Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs, whose duties include among other things the promotion of democracy and human rights; long- time Washington director of the American Civil Liberties Union, Morton Halperin, will serve as the new Assistant Secretary of Defense for Human Rights and Democracy.

With this high-level rhetorical attention and expanded bureaucracy, one would hope that U.S. law banning security assistance to countries that do not respect the human rights of their citizens---on the books since 1976- --will now be upheld. "Security assistance" is defined in the Foreign Assistance Act to include both grant aid (FMF, IMET, ESF, peacekeeping and anti-terrorism funds) and arms sales (FMS and commercial sales).

To determine which countries display a continuing pattern of human rights abuses, section 116 of the law mandates that an annual report on all recipients of U.S. foreign aid be prepared for Congress. Independent human rights monitoring groups agree that the credibility of these Country Reports on Human Rights Practices has increased greatly in recent years, as selective reporting and white-washing in the analysis of U.S. allies has receded. Nevertheless, many countries identified in the State Department's report as having severe human rights problems were among the top recipients of U.S. military aid and arms exports last year. As James O'Dea of Amnesty International USA recently testified, "the Country Reports have been cut adrift, and neither the executive branch nor the Congress formally take action based on the information that is presented to them."

Turkey, the third largest recipient of U.S. security aid, is a prime example. According to the State Department's own accounting, the Turkish govern- ment's actions in 1992 included: "torture of persons in police or security forces custody during periods of incommunicado detention and interroga- tion; political killings; `mystery killings'; disappearances;...excessive force against noncombatants by security forces; and restrictions on free- dom of expression and association." Yet, U.S. military aid and arms exports to Turkey continue because Turkey is a strategically-located NATO ally (see boxes pages 3 & 8).

Some say that by continuing security assistance and remaining engaged we will "modify" an abusive country's human rights performance. This argument, however, was discredited by the recent report of the U.N. Truth Commission on El Salvador, which showed that a decade of U.S. aid did not prevent Salvadoran forces from murdering six priests and two civilian women.

Simply ignoring section 502B undermines the rule of law generally. If Congress and the Executive Branch cannot find the will to enforce the provision, they should amend law in way that is politically enforceable, yet meaningful. One possible approach is to require a special Presidential justification for security aid to any country found in the most recent Country Reports to be violating its citizens' rights.

This is not without precedent: Beginning in 1982, the President had to certify every six months that human rights violations by the Salvadoran armed forces' were decreasing in order to continue aid. While the credibility of those certifications was doubtful long before the U.N. issued its report, the exercise regularly focused attention on El Salvador and forced the Administration to publicly address the issue. Calls for an investigation of the certification record for evidence of perjury by Reagan and Bush Administration officials should give this and future administrations pause in flagrantly misrepresenting the truth on human rights. L.L.

Administration Activities in Brief

Policy Reviews Since late January the National Security Council has been conducting a review---expected to be wrapped up soon---of policy options for dealing with conventional weapons proliferation. Meanwhile, the Defense Security Assistance Agency (DSAA) is reviewing U.S. military aid and arms sales in the post Cold War world order and is expected to be done in 2-3 months .

Ex-Im Gen. Teddy Allen, Director of the DSAA, says the idea of a govern- ment-sponsored financing mechanism for arms exports, similar to the Export-Import Bank, is still alive, but the Pentagon does not want to fund it out of the DOD budget . The arms industry has been lobbying for the creation of a $1 billion loan guarantee program, claiming that $65 million in budget authority could generate $1.2 billion in arms sales, 35,000 jobs and $250 million in tax revenues .

Air Shows On 19 April the Deputy Secretary of Defense signed a directive prohibiting active Pentagon participation at this year's Paris Air Show, to be held in June. Contractors must lease DOD-owned equipment, rather than borrowing it for free, and military personnel are limited to observing, rather than helping sell equipment.

Perm Five Talks Still no mention of what, if anything, the Administration intends to do with the languishing arms transfer control talks among the major suppliers. The last plenary meeting of the five was held almost one year ago.

Clinton Admin. Watch

Edward Djerejian: Middle East Update

8-9 March---Held over in his current post from the Bush Administration, Asst. Secretary of State for Near East Affairs Edward Djerejian updates a House Appropriations panel and a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on the Secretary of State's recent swing through the Middle East. Israel Secretary Christopher met with Palestinian and Israeli leaders. "The Palestinians expressed their continued concerns about the human rights situation in the Occupied Territories and there was an extensive discussion of issues involving the negotiations on interim self-govern- ment arrangements and final status talks." To the Israeli government, the Secretary "reaffirmed the United States' unalterable commitment to Is- rael's security and its qualitative military edge, a commitment based on our recognition of Israel's continuing security challenges." Both President Clinton and Secretary Christopher support continuing aid to Israel and Egypt at current levels, he says.

Israeli Aid Scare

In mid-March, Senators Arlen Specter and Richard Shelby, co-chairs of the Senate Caucus on U.S.-Israeli Security Cooperation, and nine others urged President Clinton to "provid[e] Israel with the same access to military technology as we furnish our closest NATO allies and...greater access to excess U.S. defense equipment." This would strengthen Israel's security and "reduce Israel's long-term dependence on foreign aid."

The drama ended (for this year anyway) on 8 April, when the Administration's FY94 budget request, containing Israel's $3 billion in aid, was released (see box, next page). Jordan "To support Jordan's positive role in the peace process and its adherence to U.N. sanctions," Djerejian says he "will recommend soon to the Secretary that he release the remaining $50 million in FY92 security assistance funds" held up by Congress in reaction to Jordan's opposition to Operation Desert Storm.

Persian Gulf In Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, Secretary Christopher "reas- sured our allies on the Arabian peninsula of our continued commitment to the security of this economically vital region." The six Gulf Cooperation Council countries "remain vulnerable to aggression from an unrepentant Iraq or a rearmed and ideologically assertive Iran."

Secretary Christopher "encouraged the Kuwaiti government's consideration of expanding suffrage and especially raised the right of women to vote in Kuwaiti elections." The other Gulf countries, he says "are in the process of creating or reviving appointed consultative councils, which is a step toward broader political participation."

Lynn Davis (New) Speaks on Arms Sales Policy

Senator Paul Sarbanes (D--Md.) follows this up in the Q&A.

Sarbanes: "...I am not sure that the position the Secretary is taking sets a high enough standard that we will be in a position to try to dissuade other countries from going down the arms sales route. There is a lot of pressure in this country to export arms as a counterbalance to the cutbacks in defense....[I]f we are going to sell arms, [other suppliers] will want to sell arms. I'm just kind of curious as to how you think it is going to be brought under control."

Davis: "...I was the person to whom Secretary of Defense Harold Brown turned [in the late 1970s] to help carry out the guidelines for arms transfer restraint that President Carter had put forward. I learned from that lesson how difficult it is in the abstract to come to judgments about the sales of arms...when in fact it always comes down to cases and to the individual set of circumstances....[W]e ought to get down to the cases and to the regions, and to place the consideration of these sales in the larger context of how we bring security to regions, and how we reduce the threats to their security which leads those states to wish to have arms, and to do that with our allies and friends, who now include Russia, to try to bring in a multilateral way constraints on the flow of arms into these regions." Sarbanes: "Well, there are some regions where we are fuelling both sides of the arms race....Greece and Turkey have been just the most obvious exam- ple."

Davis: "We moved in the past year to reductions in security assistance to those countries...."

Sarbanes: "What about the Middle East?"

Davis: "The priority of the administration is to move the Peace Process and to move to a lasting and comprehensive peace...and in that regard begin a process of potential restraints in our own sales, but more importantly, to give them confidence so that they do not see their security needs being dealt with in those ways."

Sarbanes: "Well there has been a major influx of arms into the Middle East...."

Davis: "Arms are still flowing into that part of the world... On the other hand, there are dangers in that part of the world, and for those who feel those dangers and who are our friends it still makes sense to continue those sales."

Sarbanes: "In a little over two years, the U.S. has sold over $36 billion in arms to the Middle East, most of it going to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states. Of course we take their arms levels up. Then of course we have to address Israel's position....So we in effect end up escalating the arms situation, do we not?"

Davis: "I would characterize it as finding ways to help build the security of...our friends and allies in that part of the world. The consequences of that until we can bring a lasting and just peace to that part of the world may, as you suggest, be increasing the relative capabilities of the various parties in that region."

Sarbanes: "Well, if we're doing it what argument do we use to others that they ought not do it?"

Davis: "We are engaged in a process of trying to bring peace to that part of the world...."

Sec. of State Christopher on Foreign Aid

Solicited Advice

Opposing Views on Aid for Turkey

The case "for" William Taft, formerly U.S. Ambassador to NATO and now in the employ of "International Advisers, Inc.," lobbies the Subcommittee to maintain Turkey's security assistance at last year's level of $450 million in FMF loans and $125 million in ESF grants. In FY94, however, the assistance should all be in the form of grant aid, he insists. Taft waxes: "I can think of no place where our assistance is designed to and does con- tribute more effectively to maintaining global security and stability....With the breakup of the former Soviet Union, a modern and capable Turkish military, responsive to a democratically elected govern- ment, also provides the best possible recommendation to the new republics of Central Asia for their future course. Military aid for Turkey is, in short, even more important today than it was during the Cold War."

"Over the next five years Turkey will pay almost $250 million a year just to service its FMF debt to our government....[E]very dollar Turkey spends on defense technology produced in the United States contributes directly to jobs in this country and to the maintenance of our own defense industrial base," he continues.

Further, Taft says "Turkey's territorial integrity is significantly threat- ened" by the Kurdish Workers Party, which the government is battling in southeastern Turkey.

The case "against" Dr. Vera Beaudin Saeedpour, the founder and Director of Research at the Kurdish Library in Brooklyn, testifies against aid to Turkey. Based on her 11 years of research into the plight of the Kurds, she is "persuaded that Turkey's litany of human rights abuses against its Kurdish population ought to disqualify Turkey as a recipient of U.S. foreign aid."

Unlike Kurdish guerrillas in Iraq, on whom `victim' status was conferred only in the wake of the Gulf War, Kurdish guerrillas in Turkey (the PKK) are still condemned as `separatists' and `terrorists'. Make no mistake. The primary difference between these Kurdish groups is that Iraq became our enemy and Turkey remains our friend. ....The Ankara Government has already made it clear that there is no reason to provide for the Kurds in Turkey the self-determination demanded by Kurds in Iraq....Almost simulta- neous with the U.S. led coalition's initiation of Operation Provide Comfort, the Turkish military escalated its war against the guerrillas, evacuating and destroying villages in a manner clearly reminiscent of Saddam Hus- sein's Kurdish policy.

Some 5,000-10,000 of Turkey's 15 million Kurds have been killed since 1984, when their rebellion intensified. She provides a list of journalists killed, Kurdish political activists assassinated and civilian areas bombed in 1992.

Last year the Bush Administration State Department spokesman said: "There is no question of halting U.S. military assistance to Turkey. The U.S. sees nothing objectionable in a friendly or allied country using American weapons to secure internal order or to repel an attack against its territorial unity." "Perhaps," she muses, "the new Clinton Administration will re-think its promise of `continuity in foreign policy.'"

AIPAC on Mideast Arms Race and Israeli Aid

Both agree that the high level of recent U.S. arms sales to potential enemies of Israel necessitate the aid. Thomas Dine (Executive Director of AIPAC) says: "These sales have significantly raised the cost to Israel of maintaining its own defenses, exacerbating the strain on Israel's economy, and barring a change in American policy, will continue to do so in the future. The old cry that if the United States does not sell arms, someone else will, is no longer valid. The previous Administration's Middle East arms control initiative produced few results; stronger efforts must be made by the Clinton Administration to curb the regional arms race."

Dine says AIPAC's objective is to end the unrestrained arms race in the Middle East, through both demand-side and supply-side measures.

Security Aid Reform Recommendations:
The Arms Industry Agenda

Schneider was the Under Secretary of State for International Security Affairs from 1982-1986. Now President of International Planning, a defense and export planning consulting firm in Arlington VA, Schneider also serves as the Chairman of the State Department's Defense Trade Advisory Group. Established in February 1992, its purpose is to serve as "a formal channel for regular consultation and coordination with U.S. defense exporters on issues involving the U.S. laws and regulations for munitions exports."

Given the call for reductions in foreign aid, and the increasing consolidation of the available aid in the past few years, President Clinton is going to need to do more with less, Schneider says. He suggests a few "modest statutory changes" that would coordinate security assistance more closely with arms transfer policy and reduce reliance on scarce appropriated funds.

Arms export financing First among those suggested changes is the establishment of an arms export financing mechanism: "Security Assis- tance is financed by concessional credits and grants; arms transfers are financed entirely by the end user. Creation of a defense export credit facility that was authorized to issue export credit guarantees would provide a `third way' for the President to achieve security-related ends abroad." Such a proposal was advanced in FY91 but was limited to only NATO members and major non-NATO allies. The program Schneider envi- sions "would aim for a wider range of credit-worthy nations."

Cascade surplus arms Second, he recommends that as U.S. forces downsize, the now-surplus equipment should be given to "nations who would not otherwise be described as credit worthy." Industry would benefit from contracts to modify, upgrade and maintain the "free" equip- ment, thus helping to maintain the U.S. defense-industrial-base and assist allies, without having to procure funds, he says.

Military aid to police forces Third, Schneider wants to extend security assistance beyond traditional military for- ces to counter-terror/counter-narcotics and police-type forces. "The growth in bitterlydivisive sub-national conflict may be better addressed through properly trained and equipped police than through military forces....The historical motives for denying the use of Foreign Assistance program funds for such purposes [concern about repression of civilian populations] no longer out-weigh the benefits [of] such assistance," he says.

Increase military training Fourth, Schneider recommends increasing American training of foreign individuals and units, thus extending "both military professionalism, and increased interoperability with American forces in the event of a future conflict."

Deob/Reob Fifth, Congress should increase the ability of the Executive Branch to transfer resources on short notice within foreign aid accounts, including the ability to deobligate prior-year, low-priority funds and reobligate them to more pressing matters.

Dual-Use Exports: Industrial vs. Proliferation Concerns

Freedenberg, former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Trade Administration in the Reagan Administration, says the U.S. is more stringent in enforcing export control regulations than are other countries, "but there is no point stopping a U.S. sale, if that product is still available from non-U.S. sources." To rectify this, he says "an effort needs to be undertaken to bind the current proliferation regimes' membership more forcefully to an agreed upon set of rules, greater discipline and a strength- ened organizational structure." He favors the Nuclear Suppliers' Group controls and IAEA end-use verification as a model for other weapons non- proliferation regimes. "The concept of surprise inspections and a com- mitment among the supplier nations to cut off nuclear, chemical and mis- sile technology from nations that violate the rules would go a long way towards bringing discipline to the system."

Spector notes the tension between export controls and industrial vitality: "President Clinton has embraced the competing goals of stimulating high- tech exports and controlling proliferation. Unfortunately the latter goal will necessitate tight restrictions on the very exports that the Admin- istration hopes to encourage....While high-tech exports are, and should be, an important component of the U.S. economy, at a minimum, it is essential that we be sure that they are going to, and remaining in the hands of, legitimate end-users and that exports to countries of proliferation concern be subject to the strictest scrutiny."

Human Rights and Democracy in U.S. Foreign Aid

James O'Dea (Amnesty International USA) says that the objectivity of the Reports has improved greatly over the past few years, but he criticizes the lack of response, by both the Executive Branch and Congress, to the grave human rights violations catalogued therein. The reports are "in- tended to be organically linked to the development and implementation of U.S. foreign policy. The Executive Branch was to prepare its presentation for security assistance to Congress based on the standard set out in the law and informed by the documentation in the Country Reports. Equally, Congress was to authorize and appropriate funds based on the same stan- dard and the same information. "The U.S. Government should remove itself from the work of documenting human rights abuses if its purpose is not to use the knowledge that it gains to save lives and alleviate suffering," O'Dea says.

Suggestions In order to restore the link between documenting abuses and taking action to end the abuses, O'Dea reccomends that the Country Reports identify the length of time and intensity of human rights abuses; detail U.S. government response to the abuses and recommendations made to the offending country; and report the country's response to those recom- mendations. He also suggests that the new Assistant Secretary of Defense for Human Rights and Democracy supply information on the implemen- tation of the human rights component of IMET. "Each year the Department of Defense...requests security assistance to promote human rights, but there is a failure to provide evidence of success or analysis of results." He notes an Amnesty publication, Human Rights and U.S. Security Assistance, which catalogues human rights abuses by recipients of FMF and IMET. O'Dea closes with a plea to Congress "to implement U.S. law and to prohibit security assistance in compliance with the 502B standard."

A few days later (10 March) the full Foreign Affairs Committee holds a hearing on democracy and human rights. Testifying there, Holly Burkhalter (Human Rights Watch) agrees that the 1992 report "is an excellent re- source," but she says it is no substitute "for urgent-action missions to the field and high-level attention to the subsequent findings."

Congressional investigations praised She notes the importance of past independent investigations by Congress of human rights abuse allegations and cites several examples where such investigations were responsible for turning U.S. government policy around (for example, the 1988 investi- gation by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee of the use of poison gas in Iraqi Kurdistan). "Their report became the basis for sanctions legisla- tion, which, if enacted, would have ended Ex-Im loans and commodity credits to Saddam Hussein." She notes that recently declassified diplomatic cables make clear that the State Department knew---from its Ambassador to Turkey---of the gas attack and other Kurd abuse by Iraq, but ignored it. "As it was, the question of Iraq's gross atrocities towards its own people were largely ignored until after Iraq invaded Kuwait in Au- gust of 1990."

Resumption of `Christopher Commission' To develop a more systematic approach to human rights and foreign aid, she proposes the resumption of the interagency "Christopher Commission," which existed in the Carter Ad- ministration to discuss human rights performance of aid recipients. "The group met regularly at a staff level to consider U.S. aid (including military and economic assistance, military sales, Ex-Im Bank credits and OPIC insurance) to governments with poor human rights records." If the staff could not reach consensus, they bumped it up to a higher level for consider- ation. "There were some occasions when the Secretaries themselves met to consider aid programs in light of human rights concerns." She suggests that the new Under Secretary for Global Affairs convene the group.

Pentagon/human rights Burkhalter is "intrigued" by the Pentagon's new bureau for human rights and democracy. "The Bureau can play an important role in ensuring that human rights concerns are taken into account and given high priority at every step of the military aid and sales process. We think the Bureau should at a minimum vet all participants in military training programs to exclude abusers (or even members of military units with problematic human rights records). And the Department of Defense should be willing to end altogether aid and training relationships to governments that do not demonstrate the political will to prosecute and punish human rights abusers within the military and police. We expect the new Human Rights Bureau at DOD to take the lead in investigating and eliminating military aid, training, and sales to abusive forces."

At the hearing, Michael Posner (Lawyers Committee for Human Rights) makes specific recommendations for policy toward several countries, and Bette Bao Lord (Freedom House) testifies on democracy. On 23 March, the HFAC devotes another entire hearing to promoting democracy abroad. Larry Diamond (Freedom House), Adrian Karatnycky (AFL-CIO), Professor Allen Weinstein (Center for Democracy) and Joan Nelson (Overseas Development Council) testify.

U.S. Policy Toward Peru

With the help of the Peruvian military, Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori shut down all legislative and judicial institutions on 5 April 1992. He held elections for a new Congress in November 1992 and for the Constituent Assembly in January 1993. With the restoration of democracy, the U.S. is now reportedly considering resuming aid to Peru, which was cut off after the coup. Long-standing human rights concerns about Peru's handling of the Sendero Luminoso and other insurgents remain.

Because of the military's dismal human rights record, corruption and lack of cooperation with U.S.-backed anti-narcotics programs, Youngers says no military assistance should granted to Peru in FY94, and no U.S. military trainers should operate in Peru. Technical assistance being provided to Peru by the U.S. military as part of anti-narcotics programs should be discontinued.

Graham notes that over half of Peru's population of 22 million lives below the poverty line, and she suggests that endemic poverty and the lack of basic government services (from water and sewage to judicial services) are the root causes of political instability in Peru. "The Fujimori govern- ment's counter-insurgency strategy has been strictly military in nature, and it concurrently has ignored the high social costs of its economic policies. Past U.S. policy has not been a positive force in this dynamic."

Ortiz de Zevallos disagrees with a Peruvian human rights group that the Peruvian government has "systematically violated human rights." "[I]n fighting with an autocratic style one of the most cruel subversive groups in world history, human rights violations have been frequent and in some cases unexcusable. But the word `systematically' implies that the viola- tion of human rights has been an implicit policy of the government, a state- ment for which there is no real support."

Shocked, Shocked about the Truth in El Salvador

The Truth Commissioners received testimony on over 800 murders by death squads, which it says were "often operated by the military." It further found that, "Salvadoran exiles living in Miami helped administer death squad activities [kill people?] between 1980 and 1983, with apparently little attention from the U.S. government." The Commission believes death squads "remain a potential menace."

Between 1979-1992, the U.S. gave the Salvadoran government more than $6 billion in military and economic aid. Subcommittee Chairman Robert Torricelli, says:

During the period when some of the gravest violations of human rights were occurring, the Reagan Administration was certifying progress on human rights in El Salvador....These certifications had no credibility. In- stead of using the certification process as intended, as leverage on the government of El Salvador, the Reagan Administration used it to take pressure off, by denying that abuses were continuing. Congress gave the administration the tools to prevent and oppose these abuses. But the Rea- gan Administration tragically chose to view the cause of anticommunism as justifying these abuses.

Torricelli says the Subcommittee "will review every word---every sentence uttered" by Reagan Administration officials for evidence of perjury. Meanwhile, Sen. Mark Hatfield and others demand "a full and public accounting" of the government's knowledge of abuses committed by the Sal- vadoran military.

The Truth Commission report calls for the establishment of a fund to recognize and compensate victims of human rights abuses during the war. They recommend that one percent of all future foreign aid given to El Salvador be directed toward this end.

U.S. (and Chinese) Policy toward Burma

Testifying, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan outlines the human rights abuses in Burma: "Not only are 40 million people imprisoned and terrorized, but genocidal actions against minorities are well documented....Where is the Secretary General of the United Nations on this issue? What nations are speaking out on behalf of the nearly 300,000 Rohinga Muslims who have been brutally driven out of Burma into Bangladesh?" The lack of interna- tional reaction, he claims, is in undue deference to China, SLORC's main backer.

Maureen Aung-Thwin, who serves on the board of Asia Watch and the Burma Studies Foundation, and who has just returned from a trip to Burma, says the Burmese military "is more strongly entrenched than before the vote [in 1990]: it is bigger, better armed, with a more sophisticated intelligence-gathering apparatus....[T]he junta shows no sign of giving up power in the near future."

China has sold SLORC $1.4 billion of weapons (over some unspecified time frame), including radar, anti-aircraft guns, F-6 and F-7 jet fighters, tanks, air-to-air missiles and patrol boats." (The source she cites for this information is Middle East Intelligence Report, from New Delhi of 9 March 1993.) Yugoslavia, Poland, Singapore and Pakistan are also supplying arms to SLORC, she says.

The SLORC's complicity with the drug growers is, according to Aung- Thwin, becoming "outrageously explicit." Because there is no U.S. Ambassador in Burma (since October 1990), the closest official American links with the junta are through the resident Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) officials. "The idea of a United States government agency aiding the military `landlords' of drug traffickers with narcotics interdiction is a ludicrous proposition," Aung-Thwin says. She calls on the government to re-evaluate DEA presence in Burma and to press for a U.N. Security Council-mandated arms embargo.

Deals in the Works

"Excess Defense Articles" Transferred