Disarmament: four new studies.

Citing the "marked upward spiral" in the conventional arms race, a recently-published United Nations expert study states there is "a pressing need" for measures to halt and reverse that trend and to prevent conventional war.

The study, which was submitted to the 1984 General Assembly session, has been described by Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar as "the first effort at a comprehensive consideration of the subject as a whole".

Since the Second World War, the report states, there has been an almost uninterrupted series of wars fought with conventional weapons. The developing world has been "the stage, and indeed the victim", of almost all these conflicts, many of which might have escalated to situations dangerous for world security, the experts state in their report.

Developed countries have also been involved in a large majority of these conflicts--through intervention, sometimes at the invitation of one or both parties, varying from covert assistance and limited logistic support to full participation. "Current trends do not give any reason to believe that there will be a decrease in the incidence and severity of such engagements", they conclude.

As efforts continue towards achieving nuclear disarmament, which continues to have highest priority, additional efforts should also be made towards effective measures of conventional disarmament "in order to assist in diverting the sinews of war towards the better goal of social and economic progress", the Secretary-General observes in his foreword to the report.

More than 80 per cent of the world's military expenditure is spent on conventional arms and armed forces, the report states. "In a world in which hundreds of millions suffer from hunger, malnutrition, illiteracy and ill-health, the consumption of resources on such a scale for accumulation of arms runs counter to the objectives of promoting social progress and better standards of life."

The study, which is on "all aspects of the conventional arms race and on disarmament relating to conventional weapons and armed forces" (A/39/348), was requested by the General Assembly in 1980 (resolution 35/156 A) and carried out by the Group of Experts established by the 1981 Assembly (resolution 36/97 A).

Thirty-one experts from 24 nations held seven sessions between July 1982 and July 1984 to prepare the study. Skjold G. Mellbin of Denmark served as the Group's Chairman.

The 70-page report covers the nature, causes and effects of the conventional arms race, and principles, approaches and measures regarding conventional disarmament. It defines conventional weapons in terms of land, sea and air forces, and other kinds of armed services, and their weapons, and military technology, together with equipment and facilities.

150 Conflicts Since 1945

The document highlights a number of revealing facts and statistics relating to the conventional arms race:

* In World War II, more than 50 million lives were lost, most as a result of the use of conventional weapons.

* Since 1945, it has been estimated that more than 20 million people have died in some 150 armed conflicts. More than half of the United Nations Member States have participated in one or more of these conflicts, which were fought in the territories of more than 71 States.

* In this same "period of uneasy peace", the study observes, the world has consistently devoted between 4.5 to 7 per cent of its gross national product to military expenditures. By far the largest proportion of that total is attributable to the Soviet Union and the United States and their allies.

* Of the world's total expenditure for military purposes--estimated in 1983 at some $800 billion a year--more than four fifths is spent on conventional arms and armed forces. During the 1970s, the total increase in real terms was at an average annual rate of 2.5 per cent. Over the past 10 years, the total was more than $5,000 billion at 1980 prices. If recent trends persist, the annual rate could reach or exceed $1,000 billion, well before 1990.

* Some 70 per cent of the current global total is attributable to six main military spenders--alphabetically, China, France, Federal Republic of Germany, USSR, United Kingdom and United States--with the largest share to the USSR and the United States, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

* Between 1972 and 1982, the world total of arms imports rose from $20.3 billion measured in constant 1981 values, to an estimated $34.3 billion. In 1972, regional totals were: East Asia ($7.6 billion), Europe ($5.7 billion), Middle East ($3.91 billion), Africa ($1 billion), Latin America ($800 million), South Asia ($700 million), North America ($400 million) and Oceania ($200 million). In 1982, the Middle East imported $14.4 billion worth of arms, followed by Europe ($6.3 billion), Africa ($5.1 billion), East Asia ($3.4 billion), Latin America ($2.6 billion), South Asia ($1.7 billion), North America ($600 million), and Oceania ($200 million).

* Between 1978 and 1982, the largest group of importers of major weapons was comprised of the industrialized countries, whose imports totalled about that of Latin America, Africa and Asia combined.

* During the same period, the Soviet Union and the United States each accounted for one third of total arms exports of major weapons. Ninety per cent of such exports came from six nations--the USSR, the United States, France, the United Kingdom, Italy and the Federal Republic of Germany.

* A significant proportion of military expenditure is consumed by personnel costs. The world's armed forces currently number more than 25 million--an increase of some 30 per cent over the past 20 years--not including paramilitary forces, reservists and non-military personnel engaged directly or indirectly in military-related activities.

* Militarily-significant States also possess more than 140,000 main battle tanks, 35,000 combat aircraft, 21,000 helicopters, 1,100 major surface warships, and 700 attack submarines.

The Arms Transfer

Most of the world's armaments and combat equipment are produced in a small number of countries and, while other countries and regions are acquiring weapons at an increasing rate, most weapons produced remain in the arsenals of producing States.

International arms transfers take many forms, ranging from normal trade to outright gifts. The full extent of such transfers is hard to establish, due to lack of complete information and different methods used to compile and value them.

The experts said that on the supply side, arms transfers result from the continuous escalation of the arms race and military buildup by the major Powers, practices of confrontation, and attempts to exert influence in various parts of the world. SIPRI's arms trade registers, covering major weapons on order or being delivered in 1981, identified some 1,100 separate arms transfer agreements, of which 94 per cent were for new weapons systems, 2 per cent for second-hand weapons, and 4 per cent for refurbished weapons.

"Arms sales can be very important for the capacity of particular segments of the arms industry to sustain the technological momentum that is now necessary to stay in the market, and, even more important, to prevent a backward slide to a position of military inferiority vis-a-vis other major producers of weapons", the report states.

On the demand side, many recipient States do not produce major weapons and therefore must import them to satisfy legitimate needs for self-defence and/or for acquiring military capability. Arms may be imported in response to more specific stimuli such as territorial disputes between neighbouring States; ambition for local or regional dominance, including colonial or foreign domination, on the part of one or more regional or extra-regional States; the perception of military power as an essential symbol or attribute of sovereignty; the climate of insecurity; and the increased uncertainty about the future of regional and international stability. Major civil strife involving sub-national groups can also contribute significantly to the demand for weapons.

Finally, arms transfers are only one aspect of the wider phenomenon of activities and arrangements which serve military-related purposes, the experts observe. These include arrangements in the framework of alliances or for military co-operation, such as gifts, off-sets, deployments, co-production, standardization and technical co-operation; the training of military personnel in the use of transferred weapons; the construction of a variety of military facilities; the transfer of information of military value; the loan of military advisers for assistance in the modernization of force structures and in the planning and conduct of armed conflict; the transfer of military technology; and the transfer of such equipment and technology which could have military application.

Research and Development

Massive military research and development facilities are at present intricately linked with the arms race.

Probably more than half a million scientists and engineers--some 20 per cent of the world's highly skilled scientific manpower--are employed in these establishments, which annually require funds exceeding $35 billion--a fourth of the world's total expenditure on scientific research and development.

Modern weapons are much more expensive than those built at the end of the Second World War. For example, the United States XM-1 tank, costing $2.5 million, is at least six times more expensive than the Sherman tank. The cost of a modern, sophisticated long-range bomber is $200 million, at least four times more than those of comparatively recent origin.

Technological developments have greatly improved the performance of weapons. A major trend is the ongoing development of precision guided munitions and vehicles, including remotely piloted vehicles, as well as long-range cruise missiles with multiple conventional warheads and other highly effective conventional weapons, such as weapons with onboard guidance systems, which could fundamentally change the character of conventional warfare. Nearly all technological innovation in weaponry takes place in five or six countries.

Substantial amounts of military expenditure may be hidden under "civilian items". For example, a large proportion of a country's military research and development costs might be included under a country's budget allocation for science and technology development.

Results

The results of disarmament efforts devoted to conventional weapons since 1945, both inside and outside the United Nations framework, have been "meagre", the report states. The "present international climate of insecurity and confrontation both aggravates and is aggravated by the ongoing arms race in nuclear and conventional weapons".

Tensions between East and West constitute the central feature of the present arms race, but a "complex tangle of criss-crossing conflicts and confrontations", some related to regional situations, others domestic in origin, must also be considered. Also, in withdrawing from their colonial possessions, the former colonial Powers "left behind a legacy of problems which have aggravated tensions and have further complicated the present arms race".

Progress in conventional disarmament cannot proceed very far in the absence of substantial progress in nuclear disarmament, the study goes on. "Conventional disarmament in isolation would perpetuate existing asymmetries in the security of States in favour of those States which possess nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction." The conventional disarmament process should not jeopardize the security of any State and it should be aimed at achieving general and complete disarmament. Global and regional aspects of conventional disarmament should be taken up simultaneously.

Massive efforts to develop or acquire arms, rather than improving security between countries, often undermine the very security they are intended to generate, the experts state. "The strong often become stronger but do not feel more secure, while the weak become more susceptible to external pressures and interference, and therefore are less secure."

While recognizing the right and need of each State to security, it is important to stress, the experts state, that undiminished security of States is an essential requirement of disarmament negotiations.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The contemporary conventional arms race is part of the overall accumulation of arms, including nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, the Group states in its conclusions and recommendations.

That race is global in scope in that there is now virtually no part of the world or even outer space which might not be drawn into a war. Modern conventional weapons, particularly those based on very advanced technologies, possess highly destructive capabilities, increasing lethality and, in certain cases, can create complex problems of verification, the report states.

"Negotiations for limitation and gradual reduction of armed forces and conventional weapons should be resolutely pursued", the experts state. That process should be conducted with particular emphasis on forces and weapons of nuclear-weapon States and other militarily-significant countries.

However, all countries have a duty to contribute to these efforts "in view of the nature and ferocity of conventional war fought with modern weapons and because conflict in one area can easily spread to a wider area and might even escalate into nuclear war, quite apart from the risk that nuclear war may break out in various other ways".

The Group also concludes there is a need, with a view to arriving at concrete arrangements through negotiations, to explore more thoroughly the approaches to negotiating agreements in the field of conventional arms limitations and disarmament, taking into account the various characteristics of the military forces concerned and paying special attention to those force components that might be perceived by the parties concerned to be particularly threatening.

While the Group refrained from making specific proposals concerning the precise subject, framework and timing of future negotiations on conventional disarmament, it identified eight categories of "possible concrete measures", including: reductions in military materiel; reductions in personnel; reductions in military expenditures; reductions and restrictions on military deployments; restraints on militarily-relevant research, development and testing; supplier and/or recipient agreements on reductions of international arms transfers; confidence-building measures; and public information.

Other subjects on which consultations and negotiations might take place include: measures to ensure that outer space is used solely for peaceful purposes; additional restrictions on weapons deemed to cause unnecessary suffering or have indiscriminate effects; measures to keep regions from becoming involved in confrontations or disputes originating elsewhere, including restraints on extra-regional military presence, involvement or activities, due consideration being given to the inherent right of States to individual or collective self-defence; reversal or curtailment of military activities which adversely affect the right of peoples freely to determine their systems of social and economic development and hinder the struggle for self-determination, and the elimination of colonial rule, racial or foreign domination or occupation.

Major suppliers and recipients should engage in consultations to explore possible bases for reaching agreements to restrain the transfer of arms, the experts stated. Although a possible USSR-United States arrangement on arms transfers could be an important component of any process of conventional arms limitations and disarmament, any such arrangement would need to be accompanied by wider supplier/recipient negotiations, perhaps on a regional basis.