Britain’s arms bazaar

Blood, war and profits

How big are the UK’S arms exports?

The UK is the world’s sixth-biggest arms exporting nation, according to the respected Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which puts it behind the US, Russia, China, France and Germany. However, the Government’s own figures from last year suggest that, in cash terms, only the US exported more weapons over the past decade. Britain’s defence and security sector had a turnover of £33bn in 2015, and exports of about £12bn (total UK exports were around £500bn). That it has grown so big is partly because the Ministry of Defence is one of the world’s big spenders on defence – behind only the US, China, Saudi Arabia and Russia. The ministry funnels a lot of its spending into the UK’S defence industry, which is in many respects a world leader: companies range from giants such as BAE Systems, formerly British Aerospace, and Rolls-royce (which makes engines for military aircraft), to small businesses scattered across the entire country.

And who do British firms sell arms to?

The US is a major market; and in recent years, British companies have agreed lucrative deals to sell military helicopters to Norway and South Korea, and fighter jets to India. But Britain also sells arms to almost all the nations listed by the Foreign Office as “countries of human rights concern”, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe and China. And about two-thirds of recent exports have gone to the Middle East. Indeed, Saudi Arabia accounts for more than half of all sales: between April 2015 and March 2016, it bought £3.3bn of weapons from UK firms. As export licences show, these included fighter jets (worth £1.7bn), missiles (£990m) and bombs (£62m) – and there’s evidence that some have been used in Saudi’s intervention in neighbouring Yemen’s civil war, which has caused thousands of civilian casualties. The pressure group Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) has now launched a judicial review that aims to halt UK arms sales to Saudi.

What is the Government’s position?

The Government is very supportive of the arms trade. It even has a wing of the Department of International Trade, the Defence and Security Organisation (DSO), which is dedicated to providing “specialist export advice and practical assistance”. With a staff of about 105 in London, and a network of advisers in embassies around the globe, the DSO also helps organise the world’s largest arms fair, London’s biennial Defence and Security Equipment International, which will be held in the Docklands this September.

Why is the Government so helpful?

It’s eager to promote manufacturing and exports in general. The arms industry directly sustains 218,000 jobs, nourishing high-tech skills. Exports boost not only the industry itself, but also linked sectors such as aerospace; and they drive down defence costs by generating economies of scale for UK firms. The Government also argues that arms exports deepen Britain’s relationships with allies, delivering “wider foreign policy objectives”. “Responsible” exports “are essential for our security and prosperity”, it claimed in its 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review.

What are “responsible” exports?

The Government describes its list of legal criteria for arms exports as “one of the most robust” in the world. Exports must not be made to nations that defy UN or EU embargoes, nor to those that support terrorism or organised crime, or which might re-export the arms to “undesirable destinations”. The most important – and most contested – rule is that licences should not be granted if there is a clear risk that the exports might be used in “a serious violation of international humanitarian law”, or for “internal repression”.

How do these export rules work in practice?

It’s not entirely clear. Questioned over the issue of Saudi Arabia in November, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said the Government was “confident in its robust case-by-case assessment” of export licences. But documents released as part of CAAT’S court case show that serious concerns have, in fact, been raised. In early 2016, the then business secretary Sajid Javid seriously considered suspending Yemen-related arms sales to Saudi – on the advice of the head of export controls. The Defence Ministry is now tracking “incidents of concern” involving civilian casualties in Yemen. However, establishing whether a given nation has violated rules “may be extremely difficult, and indeed possibly inappropriate”, said the Government’s lawyer in the case: not only is it hard for officials to audit “armed conflicts by friendly governments”, it may also “affect diplomatic relations with that country”.

Are friendly nations ever denied export licences?

Yes, though they tend to be narrow exceptions, not blanket bans. After the Arab Spring, when it became clear that British weapons, ammunition and crowd control equipment had been used on civilian protesters in Bahrain and Egypt, the Government revoked 158 licences. However, the sale of unrelated military equipment continued. For the most part, action falls short even of that: after Israel’s assault on Gaza in 2014, export licences for this significant arms customer and supplier were reviewed but left intact.

Is there any hope of an ethical arms export industry?

Germany’s Heckler & Koch has announced it will no longer deal with non-nato countries, because it has become too difficult to get export approvals. But since both Russia and China are keen to grow their own arms exports, the industry is likely to become more, not less, cutthroat. As “competition gets fiercer”, says Paul Rogers, professor of peace studies at Bradford University, “ethical dimensions, to put it politely, will diminish somewhat”.