As the situation in Burma does not im
prove, questions of what the interna
tional community can do arise. It is important to keep communication channels with the junta open. However, it is essential to protect the people of Burma. One way to do this is by imposing universal arms embargoes against the Burmese junta.
Arms embargoes make it illegal for countries to sell weapons, ammunition and military technology to another State. This prevents the State from building up its military resources. As the arms stockpile is used, this supply should run out, and it should not be replenished. Thus, the state’s ability to inflict violence and death unto others is removed.
But while removing a country’s ability to build up its military, the imposing state still remains neutral in the conflict. Due to being neutral it means diplomatic channels stay open.
In the case of Burma a number of countries and coalitions of States have imposed arms embargoes against the regime. This action makes a statement, and a difference. The United States and the European Union, two of the world’s leading developers of military technology, have active embargoes against the junta. This means their cutting-edge, innovative, state-of-the-art military equipment is not being sold to the Burmese military.
Sadly, while some countries have embargoes against the regime, most do not. The junta can legally buy weapons, ammunition and military technology from many nations. Since 2002 the junta has been on a weapons shopping spree. Burma has bought eight 75mm Howitzers (a cannon artillery, known for its high angle trajectory) from India, radar systems, tanks and 500 armoured personnel carriers from the Ukraine, “Nora” self-propelled Howitzer and an upgrade of its fleet of Soko G-4 jets from Serbia and MIG-29 Fighter jets from Russia. The junta also has received unspecified cargo from North Korea, and it has a major arms deal with China. The army is estimated to have 400,000 soldiers, including people who were forcibly recruited and 70,000 child soldiers1.
Undeniably, China is Burma’s leading arms supplier. China exports $6,372 million US dollars of military equipment to developing nations2 and has reportedly exported US $1.4 billion worth of military equipment to the junta since 1993. In 2004 the Burmese junta spent approximately $477.7 million US dollars on the military - nearly half its national budget. This amount is expected to increase as profits from recent “development” projects, such as the Yadana Gas Pipeline, run by French company TOTAL and US-based UNOCAL, start rolling in.
But the China-Burma relationship is not only about the sale of weapons. It is also believed to be the reason why there is no universal arms embargo in place against Burma. A universal arms embargo would mean that no country could sell weapons, ammunition or military technology to Burma.At present, the United Nations is the only institution with the power to impose a universal arms embargo. Unfortunately, for Burma they have failed to do so. China, a UN Security Council permanent member and therefore a country with the power to veto any motion before the council, is disinclined to impose any embargo. In particular when they are against a country that is such a good client of their arms industry.
Since 1992 the Security Council has imposed universal embargoes preventing the supply of weapons and military assistance to four countries: Somalia, Liberia, Angola and Rwanda3. Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter the embargoes were imposed against countries where there was an ongoing civil war, which led to a humanitarian crisis. With this as precedent in an ideal world, one would expect the UN Security Council would imposed a universal arms embargo against Burma.
Of course, as discussed previously, the lucrative arms relationship between China and Burma is the primary motivation for China preventing the UN from imposing such a sanction. There are further reasons for Chinese intransigence on this issue. Following Beijing’s crackdown on democracy and human rights protesters in 1988 in Tiananmen Square, many western countries separately imposed arms embargoes against China. Today the EU embargo is still active. The Chinese government’s recent request to have this embargo revoked was denied, because there has been little improvement in the country’s human rights situation. As China understands the repercussion of an arms embargo against a country, it is less likely to impose one. Especially, when it is against a regime that the Chinese government supports both politically and economically.
If China’s embargo had been revoked, the consequences for Burma’s people would have been disastrous. The EU would have implemented control measures to prevent their weapons being sold to EU embargoed countries, such as Burma. But anything in China is available - at a price. As the junta has money, it would have had access to nearly all of the world’s arms. An arms embargo does not only affect the State that it is imposed against. It also affects all the countries that the State would sell weapons too. With regards to China, this is a prevalent issue, and needs to be taken into account when considering lifting China’s arms embargo.
In 2004 the Burmese
junta spent approximately $477.7 million US dollars
on the military - nearly half its national budget
While countries incorporate control measures in their embargoes to prevent weapons being sold to embargoed countries through a third State, they do not always work. The EU has had an embargo against the export of arms and military equipment to the junta since 1996. All EU arms embargoes, including Burma’s, prohibits the export, directly or indirectly – through a third country – of all military items, including vehicles that have been manufactured or altered for military use4. However, only last month an investigation began into a German engineering company, Deultz, for allegedly breaking the embargo by supplying weapons to Burma. Deultz supplied engines to a company in the United Arab Emirates. The engines were then re-sold to a Ukrainian company, who modified them and used them in armoured cars. The cars were then sold to Burma. A Deultz company spokesperson said their company acted legally in shipping the engines to the United Arab Emirates. The Ukraine and the United Arab Emirates do not have any arms embargos against Burma.
If there was a universal arms embargo in place, all countries would be bound by it. Consequently, selling arms through a third country could not happen. However, weapons would be still available through the black market. Today through this illegal channel, arms are smuggled into Burma. Currently it is opposition groups that benefit from this market but if the junta could not buy weapons legally from China, it would certainly turn to the black market. Weapon’s dealing is a lucrative industry that will exist as long as there is market for it. While dictatorships like the junta have money, they will be able to buy arms.
Since 1962 when the military seized power, the people of Burma have been living under one of the world’s most oppressive military dictatorships. The situation is far from improving. During the latest offensive in Southern Karenni State in February there were allegations from Karenni rebel soldiers that the junta used chemical weapons. These reports were collaborated by defectors from the Burmese army. Landmine use is prevalent, with one civilian landmine amputee per day in Karen State alone. Earlier this year during military offensives in Karen and Karenni States approximately 8,000 villagers became internally displaced persons, and 20 tonnes of rice were destroyed. The Burmese military systematically uses forced labour on development projects and during military offensives, including using people as human mine sweeps. Such oppression and human rights violations are possible through the junta’s strength of arms.
But a universal arms embargo is something that the Burmese people want. In 1990 Aung San Suu Kyi was put under house arrest and the junta denied the National League for Democracy (NLD) the opportunity to form the government. Since then the NLD have been calling for the international community to impose economic sanctions including a universal arms embargo against the regime. From interviews BI field staff have carried out with the grassroots people, they too have reiterated the need for an embargo. And they want it to be enforced now, as each day Burma becomes more militarised.
A universal arms embargo will not solve all of Burma’s problems. But without a doubt it is part of the solution. Imposing an arms embargo is an achievable goal that could be the first step in creating a true peace in Burma. In October, the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Burma, Professor Paulo Pinheiro, will report to the United Nations General Assembly. Following his report, the General Assembly will discuss the situation of Burma. This is an opportunity to get the question of an arms embargo on the agenda and, to try and get a motion passed. Every person can write a letter to his or her government and politicians asking for action.
Our apathy to the oppression of the Burmese people is as bad as the junta’s guilt. There has been a call for action from the people who are suffering in Burma . We have ignored their voices for long enough. A universal arms embargo will make a difference.
Isn’t it time we made it harder for the Burmese army?
In 2004 the Burmese
junta spent approximately $477.7 million US dollars
on the military - nearly half its national budget
