COALITION FOR DEFENCE ALTERNATIVES

Reducing South Africa's Dependence on the Arms Industry

During the apartheid years South Africa built up a sophisticated arms industry, largely due to the fact that the arms embargo made it difficult for military hardware to be sourced overseas. Local arms manufacturers did not supply only the SADF; every effort was made to export arms to other countries. It is well known, for example, that South African artillery was used by both sides in the Iran/Iraq war.

After the 1994 democratic elections, the National Conventional Arms Control Committee (NCACC) was instituted. This cabinet committee exists in order to govern the marketing, export and transfer of conventional arms.

In a document entitled 'NCACC Rationale and Principles', drawn up by the Committee, a set of principles is listed. These are intended to act as guidelines according to which the Committee will evaluate proposed arms sales. Without going into detail, these principles are extremely progressive and far-sighted, and amount to a commitment not to trade in arms wherever human rights, peace or development would be threatened by such trade.

Unfortunately, experience since 1994 indicates that these principles exist only on paper; the Committee has repeatedly ignored them in its actual decisions. A few examples illustrate the point:

• In early 1998 the NCACC approved the sale of 'Remote-Piloted Aircraft' to Algeria. These are used for artillery spotting, enabling more accurate use of heavy guns. At that time Algeria was in a state of virtual civil-war, and had an appalling human rights record. The principles state that "respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in the recipient country" will be taken into account; as will "the internal security situation in the recipient country, in the light of existing tensions or armed conflicts."
• In 1997 arms to the value of over R26 million were exported to Israel, despite the NCACC's commitment to avoid arms transfers likely to "contribute to the escalation of regional conflicts" or to "contribute to regional instability and negatively influence the balance of power."
• Despite affirming that "the reduction of world military expenditures could have significant positive impact for the social and economic development of peoples" and acknowledging the "objective of the least diversion of human and economic resources for armaments" South Africa sold arms to numerous poor countries in 1997: Cameroon - R14 million; Colombia - R71 million; Ecuador - R19 million; India - R600 million; Ivory Coast - R6 million; Kenya - R5 million; Pakistan - R32 million; Peru -R14 million; Congo Brazzaville - R31 million; Rwanda - R15 million; Tanzania -R8 million; Thailand - R36 million; Tunisia - R5 million; Uganda - R9 million.
• It has been reported in the press recently that Denel is negotiating the sale of artillery shells to India, even though that country is once again involved in a war with Pakistan over Kashmir. So far, the NCACC has not ruled out such transfers.

It must be conceded, of course, that there are also instances where the NCACC has prevented arms transfers, as in the case of Turkey. However, this only serves to reinforce the impression that the principles supposedly governing our arms sales are inconsistently and arbitrarily applied.

The root of the problem lies in the notion that our arms industry must be economically viable. The argument proceeds as follows: The Constitution requires a national defence force. Such a force must be adequately equipped in order to carry out its mandate. In order for it to be properly equipped and for certainty in this regard in the future, we must have a defence industry capable of equipping it. Such an industry ought to be cost-effective, producing items in large quantities so that the unit cost to the SANDF is reduced. Therefore, the defence industry must be permitted--even encouraged--to export its products.

Note that the rationale for arms sales is thus an economic one--by exporting arms we reduce their cost to our own defence force. In the instances mentioned above, therefore, the human rights and well-being of people from Algeria to Thailand and from the Middle-East to Latin America are being sacrificed in order to secure cheaper weapons for the SANDF.

This is in itself an intolerable situation. But the reality is even worse. If, by exporting arms, our country was actually managing to maintain an economically viable defence industry, it could at least be argued that the South African citizen was benefiting (albeit at the cost of the citizens of other countries). But our defence industry is nowhere near being viable, even given the NCACC's evident willingness to provide export clearances.

According to figures released by the NCACC, the total value of arms exports for the years 1996 - 1998 amount to R2 488 million, of which more than half occurred in 1997. This income has to be set off against the industry's vast costs. For example, the development of the Rooivalk attack helicopter cost over R2 billion (and not one has yet been sold to an overseas buyer). When Armscor was unbundled the arms manufacturing unit, Denel, took over land, plant and equipment worth in the region of R4 billion; in other words, state assets to this value have been sunk into Denel. The G6 heavy canon is also estimated to have cost some R2 billion in development. And Denel has historically enjoyed a range of export incentives and other subsidies (many of which, fortunately, no longer apply). Finally, Armscor still exists as a marketing arm for the defence industry, thus saving the manufacturing side the costs associated with marketing.

It will be seen, then, that the defence industry ran up costs and used up assets to the value of well over R8 billion during the period when it managed to sell R2.488 billion worth of weapons (and how much of the later figure is actual profit is unknown). So much for economic viability.

The Coalition for Defence Alternatives is of the view that the South African defence industry, like its counterparts around the world, is ethically compromised and economically non-viable. South Africa has other, far more valuable, expertise to export to war-zones: our experience of peaceful settlement of political conflicts, of nation-building, of constitutional government, and so on.

A shut-down of the arms industry would generate a massive saving in state expenditure. The highly-skilled employees of the industry are desperately needed in other sectors. The technology and skills which undoubtedly exist in the industry could be used to enhance our competitiveness in other areas of manufacturing. And we would be sending an important message to the rest of the world that at least one nation was far-sighted enough to escape from the moral and economic dead-end that is the arms industry.