Campaign Against the Arms Trade highlights UK arms sales to autocratic regimes

August 2023

In the last post discussing the possibility of the UK leaving the European Convention on Human Rights, currently being discussed in government, we commented on a lack of concern about arms sales and the activities of resource companies in destabilising countries. This led to conflict and millions suffering and being displaced, some of whom ended up at Calais much to the ire of politicians and parts of the press.

The latest issue of CAAT News (Issue 266, Summer 2023) puts some flesh on the bones of our (and other country’s) arms sales and where they are being sold. Surprisingly, sales sales by the Soviet Union and China have actually declined and in the case of Russia because of the war in Ukraine which is consuming large amounts of military materiel. Chinese sales have dropped by around a quarter according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) because of possible ‘stockpiling’. By contrast, UK sales doubled in 2022 to around £8.5bn. These facts somewhat dent the argument that if we don’t sell the arms, someone else will. Some sales are identified by Single Individual Export Licences (SIELs) where it is possible to know what and to whom weapons are being sold. The biggest recipient by value is Qatar due in the main to the sale of Typhoon aircraft. However, just over half of arms sales are by ‘open licence’ which allows for unlimited exports.

The dismal state of human rights in Qatar received a degree of publicity during the World Cup. The kafala system of employment is still in place in which migrant workers are tied to their employers. Wage theft is widespread. Women are second class citizens and those under 25 must obtain permission from a male guardian to travel, study or work in government jobs. Women fleeing violent domestic abuse are returned home by the police. Freedom of expression is curtailed. Same sex relationships are a crime.

Similar considerations apply to arms sales to Saudi Arabia another big market for UK arms. These arms have been used in the war in Yemen – currently subject to an uneasy peace – and which has contributed to the world’s worst humanitarian disaster. Just about every aspect of human rights misery has been inflicted on the country whether it’s the effects of the war and bombing, disease and starvation, activities of the Houthi rebels including the use of torture. Human rights in Saudi itself are extremely poor with 81 people executed in one day in March 2022. Women have reduced rights, torture and forced confessions are commonplace and freedom of expression is severely curtailed.

CAAT has attempted to halt our activities in aiding the Saudis but sad to report, have lost their case in the Divisional Court hearing in June. The reasoning of the judges is highly questionable and in some instances, hard to credit. The Saudis’ Coalition Joint Incident Assessment Team (JIAT) has frequently failed to investigate alleged incidents of violations of International Humanitarian Law in the Yemen war which has allowed the government to argue that that there was insufficient evidence to accept violations were even possible, despite evidence that there had been from a variety of NGOs.

The government also argued that to pursue allegations would offend the Saudis and expend valuable diplomatic capital. The Saudis’ failure to investigate alleged violations and their sensitivity to criticism was sufficient for the judges to dismiss the case.

Are UK’s ‘rigorous and robust policies’ a sham?

The government is often quoted as saying they have a ‘rigorous and robust’ policy of export controls. The evidence shows otherwise. The UK has grown its sales and is providing arms to a variety of unstable countries and countries run by despots of varying kinds, seemingly with no concern for the welfare and rights of the citizens of those countries. Open licences allow us to export arms to Turkey for example where the government has for years carried on a war of brutal repression against the Kurdish minority including the targeting of civilians. The US Congress is reluctant to allow sales of F-16 fighters because of Turkey’s frequent violations of Greece’s airspace, its repressive policies and president Erdoğan’s refusal to allow Sweden to join NATO. No such considerations apply to the UK which in addition to a massive SIEL of £452m, has granted an unlimited number of open licences.

It seems as though there is little connection now between morality or human rights with the desire to support and turn a blind eye to the sale of weapons to whomsoever asks for them. Appeals to the judiciary end in failure with judges only too willing to swallow government arguments of the most specious kind. The UK’s desire to allow and support arms sales is a blot on the country’s reputation.

Sources: mostly CAAT. Amnesty and HRW