Assessing Supply-Side Arms Control

  • William J. Durch

Abstract

Campaigns to rein in major weapon systems date back a very long time, at least to Pope Innocent II’s effort to ban the crossbow in 1139. Most such efforts have been only partly or temporarily successful. (Innocent’s own campaign failed to take hold, and the crossbow was widely used until rendered obsolete by a deadlier weapon, the English longbow.1) Governments are instinctively averse to abandoning militarily useful weapons and to waiving their rights to acquire them. Unless done unilaterally, with no expectation of reciprocity from others, arms restraint requires a great deal of international cooperation and inevitably some degree of trust and risk, three things to which countries that function in a formal state of anarchy are at least semi-averse. Still, the twentieth century—perhaps because it was one of the bloodiest on record—witnessed a greater number of arms control and disarmament plans, programs, and agreements than any century previous.

Keywords

Europe Radar Explosive Turkey Arena 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Adams, Gordon. The Iron Triangle: The Politics of Defense Contracting. New Brunswick: Transaction Books, 1982.Google Scholar
  2. Agmon, Marcy, et al. Arms Proliferation Policy: Support to the Presidential Advisory Board. MR-771-OSD. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. Anthony, Ian. “Conventional Arms Transfer Control.” Pacific Research (May 1995): 43.Google Scholar
  4. Arms Control Association. “The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR).” Background paper. Washington, D.C.: September 1993.Google Scholar
  5. Baldwin, David A. ed. Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  6. Ball, Nicole. Pressing for Peace: Can Aid Induce Reform? Policy Essay No. 6. Washington, D.C.: Overseas Development Council, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. Beitz, Charles R. Political Theory and International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  8. Blechman, Barry M., Janne E. Nolan, and Alan Platt. “Pushing Arms” Foreign Policy 46 (Spring 1982).Google Scholar
  9. Boese, Wade. “Divisions Still Impede Wassenaar Export Control Regime at Plenary.” Arms Control Today (Nov./Dec. 1997). Internet: http://www.armscontrol.org/ACT/JAN_FEB/wass.html.
  10. British American Security Information Council. “EU Code of Conduct” Internet: http://basicint.org/eucode.htm.
  11. Brodie, Bernard and Fawn M. From Crossbow to H-Bomb. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press, 1973.Google Scholar
  12. Buzan, Barry. People, States, and Fear. 2nd ed. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1991.Google Scholar
  13. —, Charles Jones, and Richard Little. The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  14. Damrosch, Lori Fisler, ed. Enforcing Restraint: Collective Intervention in Armed Conflicts. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  15. —, and David J. Scheffer, eds. Law and Force in the New International Order. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  16. Dupuy, T. N. “Can We Rely Upon Computer Combat Simulations?” Armed Forces Journal International (August 1987): 58–63.Google Scholar
  17. Durch, W. J. “Introduction to Anarchy: Humanitarian intervention and ‘State-building’ in Somalia.” In UN Peacekeeping, American Policy, and the Uncivil Wars of the 1990s. Edited by William J. Durch. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  18. Epstein, Joshua. Conventional Forces: A Dynamic Assessment. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1990.Google Scholar
  19. Federation of American Scientists. “Code of Conduct—Legislative History.” Internet: http://www.fas.org/asmp/campaigns/code/codehist.html. Accessed March 2, 2000.
  20. Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. “Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons …” Internet: http://www.tufts.edu/departments/fletcher/multi/texts/BH790.txt.Accessed June 11, 1999.
  21. Foxwell, David. “Anti-ship cruise missiles Home-in on Littoral Requirements.” Jane’s International Defense Review (8/1996): 63.Google Scholar
  22. Freedom House. Freedom Review. February issue. Annual. Internet: http://www.freedomhouse.org/.
  23. Friends Committee on National Legislation. “Legislative History of the Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers.” Internet: http://www.fcnl.org/pub/fcnl/codehist.htm. Accessed April 9, 1998.
  24. Gething, Michael J. “Balancing the pitfalls and potential of aircraft upgrade.” Jane’s International Defence Review (December 1998): 30–37.Google Scholar
  25. Goldblat, Jozef. Arms Control: A Guide to Negotiations and Agreements. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Pub., 1994.Google Scholar
  26. Goldring, Natalie. “President Bush’s Middle East Arms Control Initiative: One Year Later.” Arms Control Today (June 1992): 12.Google Scholar
  27. Government of Canada. “Ottawa Convention.” Internet: http://www.mines.gc.ca. Accessed November 1999.
  28. Grieco, Joseph M. “Realist International Theory and the Study of World Politics” In New Thinking in International Relations Theory. Edited by Michael W. Doyle and G. John Ikenberry. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  29. Hartung, William D. And Weapons for All. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1994.Google Scholar
  30. Harvey, John R. “Regional Ballistic Missiles and Advanced Strike Aircraft: Comparing Military Effectiveness” International Security (Fall 1992): 41–83.Google Scholar
  31. —, and Uzi Rubin. “Controlling Ballistic Missiles: How Important? How To Do It?” Arms Control Today (March 1992): 13–18.Google Scholar
  32. Hitchens, Theresa. “Experts Tout Post-COCOM Regime, Despite Shortfalls.” Defense News (January 29–February 4, 1996).Google Scholar
  33. Hufbauer, G. C., et al. Economic Sanctions Reconsidered: History and Current Policy. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics, 1990.Google Scholar
  34. International Committee of the Red Cross. “The Vienna Review Conference.” International Review of the Red Cross 309 (November 1, 1995): 672–77.Google Scholar
  35. Johnson, Rebecca. “Viewpoint: The CTBT and the 1997 NPT Prepcom.” The Nonproliferation Review 3:3 (Spring–Summer 1996): 55–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jones, J. Stealth Technology: The Art of Black Magic (np: Tab Aero, nd.). Cited in “B-2 From Any View.” Air&Space Magazine (Smithsonian), April/May 1997. Internet: http://www.airspacemag.com/ASM/mag/supp/am97/stealth.html. Accessed June 13, 1999.
  37. Keller, William W., and Janne E. Nolan. “The Arms Trade: Business As Usual?” Foreign Policy (Winter 1997–98): 113–25.Google Scholar
  38. Kemp, Geoffrey. “Regional Security, Arms Control, and the End of the Cold War.” The Washington Quarterly (Autumn 1990).Google Scholar
  39. Laurance, Edward J. The International Arms Trade. New York: Lexington Books, 1992.Google Scholar
  40. Mallin, Maurice A. “CTBT and NPT: Options for U.S. Policy.” The Nonproliferation Review 2:2 (Winter 1995): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Markusen, Ann. “The Rise of World Weapons.” Foreign Policy (Spring 1999): 40–51.Google Scholar
  42. McMahon, K. Scott, and Dennis M. Gormley. Controlling the Spread of Land-Attack Cruise Missiles. Marina del Rey, Calif.: American Institute for Strategic Cooperation, January 1995.Google Scholar
  43. Mearsheimer, John J. “Back to the Future: instability in Europe after the Cold War.” In The Perils of Anarchy. Edited by Michael E. Brown, Sean M. Lynn-Jones, and Steven E. Miller. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  44. Nelson, Joan M., and Stephanie J. Eglinton. Global Goals, Contentious Means: Issues of Multiple Aid Conditionality. Policy Essay No. 10. Washington, D.C.: The Overseas Development Council, 1993.Google Scholar
  45. Nolan, Janne E. “The Global Arms Market after the GulfWar: Prospects for Control” The Washington Quarterly (Summer 1991): 132.Google Scholar
  46. —. “The U.S.-Soviet Conventional Arms Transfer Talks.” In U.S. Soviet Security Cooperation. Edited by Alexander George, et al. Oxford University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  47. Nolan, Janne E. (chair), Edward Randolph Jayne, II, Ronald E. Lehman, Dave E. McGiffert, and Paul C. Warnke. Report of the Presidential Advisory Board on Arms Proliferation Policy. Washington, D.C.: 1996.Google Scholar
  48. Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. “Nobel Laureates’ International Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers.” Internet: http://www.wagingpeace.org/codeofconduct.html or at http://www.igc.apc.org/basic/code_itl.htm. Accessed April 8, 1998.
  49. Odessey, Bruce. “Officials Defend U.S. Participation in Wassenaar Arrangement.” Internet: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/6/hrc.htm. Accessed June 17, 1999.
  50. Perine, Keith. “Feds Release Revised Crypto Export Rules.” The Standard, January 12, 2000. Internet: http://www.thestandard.net/article/display/0,1151,8780,00.html. Accessed March 2, 2000.
  51. Pierre, Andrew J. The Global Politics of Arms Sales. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Posen, Barry R. “Measuring the European Conventional Balance: Coping with Complexity in Threat Assessment.” International Security (Winter 1984–85): 47–88.Google Scholar
  53. Reed, Laura W., and Carl Kaysen, eds. Emerging Norms of Justified Intervention. Cambridge, Mass.: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1993.Google Scholar
  54. Reinecke, Wolfgang H. “From Denial to Disclosure: The Political Economy of Export Controls and Technology Transfer.” In Bridging the Nonproliferation Divide: The United States and India. Edited by Francine Frankel. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1995.Google Scholar
  55. Roberts, Brad. “From Nonproliferation to Antiproliferation.” International Security (Summer 1993): 165–66.Google Scholar
  56. Saferworld. “Developing the Wassenaar Arrangement: A new arms export control regime.” London, September 1996. Internet: http://www.gn.apc.org/sworld/wassen.html.
  57. —. “The EU Code of Conduct on the arms trade: Final Analysis.” Internet: http://ww.gn.apc.org/SWORLD/ARMSTRADE/code.html. Accessed June 14, 1999.
  58. Sampson, Anthony. The Arms Bazaar: From Lebanon to Lockheed. New York: Bantam Books, 1977.Google Scholar
  59. Simmons, Henry T. “U.S. Arms Sales and the Carter White House.” International Defense Review (March 1979).Google Scholar
  60. Smith, Chris. “Light Weapons and Ethnic Conflict in South Asia” In Lethal Commerce: The Global Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons. Edited by Jeffrey Boutwell, Michael T. Klare, and Laura W. Reed. Cambridge, Mass.: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1995.Google Scholar
  61. Sternman, Mark S. “Mechanics of an Arms Sale.” Fact sheet. Washington, D.C.: Peace Action, April 1993.Google Scholar
  62. Stremlau, John. Sharpening International Sanctions: Toward a Stronger Role for the United Nations. Report to the Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict. Washington, D.C., November 1996.Google Scholar
  63. United Nations. Department of Public Information. “East Timor—NTAET—Background.” Internet: http://www.un.org/peace/etimor/UntaetB.htm. Accessed January 22, 2000.
  64. UN Human Rights Commission. Reports. Internet: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/2/chr.htm. Accessed June 17, 1999.
  65. U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Arms Control and Disarmament Agreements: Texts and Histories of Negotiations. Washington, D.C. Internet at: http://www.acda.gov/treaties.
  66. —. List of Dual Use Goods and Technologies and Munitions List, submitted to the Plenary Meeting in Vienna, 11–12 July 1996. ACDA document No. 97023, declassified April 25, 1997. Annexes 1 and 2. Internet: http://jya.com/wa/watoc.htm. Accessed April 8, 1998.
  67. —. “The Missile Technology Control Regime.” Fact sheet. September 15, 1997. Internet: http://acda.gov/factshee/exptcon/mtcr96.htm.
  68. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Export Administration. “Fact Sheet: Administration Implements Updated Encryption Export Policy.” January 12, 2000. Accessed March 2, 2000 via the Center for Democracy and Technology. Internet: http://www.cdt.org/crypto/admin/000112commercefactsheet.shtml.
  69. U.S. Department of State. “Conventional Arms Transfer Policy, Statement by the President, May 19, 1977.” Department of State Bulletin 13, no. 21 (1977).Google Scholar
  70. —. Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, 1998. Internet: http://www.state.gov/www/services/survey.html.
  71. U.S. Department of State. Office of the Spokesman. “The Wassenaar Arrangement.” Address by Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs Lynn E. Davis, at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, D.C., January 23, 1996.Google Scholar
  72. U.S. Department of State. Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism. Patterns of Global Terrorism, 1998, April 1999. Internet: http://www.state.gov/www/global/terrorism/1998Report/1998index.html.
  73. Vaccaro, J. Matthew. “The Politics of Genocide: Peacekeeping and Disaster Relief in Rwanda.” In UN Peacekeeping, American Policy, and the Uncivil Wars of the 1990s. Edited by William J. Durch. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  74. Walkling, Sarah. “Wassenaar Members End Plenary: First Data Exchange Falls Short.” Arms Control Today (Jan./Feb. 1997). Internet: http://www.armscontrol.org/ACT/novdec97/wassnov.htm.
  75. Waltz, Kenneth N. The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: More May Be Better. Adelphi Paper 171. London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 1981.Google Scholar
  76. —, and Scott D. Sagan. The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate. New York: W.W. Norton, 1995.Google Scholar
  77. Wassenaar Arrangement. “Elements for Objective Analysis and Advice Concerning Potentially Destabilising Accumulations of Conventional Weapons.” Paper approved by the plenary meeting of the Wassenaar Arrangement, December 3, 1998. Internet: http://www.wassenar.org/docs/criteria.html. Accessed June 13, 1999.
  78. —. “Public Statement,” Vienna, Austria, December 3, 1998. Internet: http://www.wassennaar.org/docs/press_4.html. Accessed June 14, 1999.
  79. —. Texts of all public documents. Internet: http://wassenaar.org/doc/press_3.html. Accessed June 11, 1999.
  80. White House. Office of the Press Secretary. “Fact Sheet on Conventional Arms Transfer Policy.” February 17, 1995. Internet: http://www.fas.org/asmp/library/white_house/whfacts.html. Accessed June 12, 1999.

Copyright information

© The Century Foundation, Inc. 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • William J. Durch

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations