斯德哥尔摩国际和平研究所-National-reports-on-arms-exports_8页_385kb

Summary of National Reports on Arms Exports

Core Content

This document provides an overview of national reports on arms exports, highlighting the increasing trend in transparency and the variations in the level of detail across different countries. It discusses the evolution of reporting mechanisms, the role of international organizations and the EU in promoting arms export transparency, and the challenges in collecting and disseminating comprehensive data on arms exports and brokering activities.

Main Points

• Rise in Reporting: Since the early 1990s, more governments have published national reports on arms exports, with 29 states doing so by 2009. This reflects increased public and parliamentary oversight, driven by scandals and demands for accountability.

• Variability in Detail: The level of detail in these reports varies widely. Some provide basic information on export control systems and licences, while others include specifics such as descriptions of goods, end-users, and financial values. However, transparency remains inconsistent globally.

• EU Leadership: The EU has been a key driver of arms export reporting, especially since the adoption of the EU Code of Conduct in 1998 and the EU Common Position in 2008. These frameworks require member states to submit data on arms exports and licenses, and the EU publishes an annual report that aggregates this information.

• Limited Global Participation: Outside of Europe, the practice of publishing national arms export reports is limited. Only three non-European states (Canada, South Africa, and the United States) have published reports on arms exports for 2009.

• Data on Licences: Most reports include data on arms export licences, such as the number of licences, their financial value, and details on the goods and end-users. However, some countries still lack sufficient transparency, particularly in identifying the goods exported to specific destinations.

• Actual Exports: Information on actual arms exports is less commonly included in national reports. Only 25 of the 38 most recent reports provide data on actual exports, with limited disaggregation by destination or control list category.

• Licence Denials: Information on export licence denials is also scarce. Only 23 reports include data on denials, with some providing financial values, goods descriptions, and reasons for denials, but most lack sufficient detail to understand the full implications.

• Arms Brokering: Information on arms brokering is rare, as many governments are hesitant to disclose details due to concerns about national security and the potential for misuse by undesirable actors. Only 8 reports mention brokering licences, and just 2 report on actual arms transfers involving brokers.

Key Information

• Key Countries: The United States was the first country to publish a national arms export report in 1961. The EU, particularly Sweden, was among the first European states to publish such reports, with the practice spreading to most EU member states by 2009.

• EU Annual Report: The EU publishes an annual report on arms exports that includes data on licence approvals, actual exports, and denials. The 12th annual report, covering 2009, was delayed and had incomplete data from major exporters like France, Germany, and the UK.

• Reporting Trends: The number of states publishing reports has grown significantly, from 4 in 1990 to 29 in 2009. However, the level of detail in these reports remains uneven, with many countries still not providing full transparency.

• Challenges in Transparency: Despite efforts to standardize reporting, many states still do not provide detailed information on arms exports, brokering activities, and licence denials. This limits the ability to fully assess the impact of arms transfers and to ensure compliance with international norms and standards.

Table of Key Statistics

Conclusion

The trend toward transparency in arms exports is growing, especially within the European Union. However, the lack of standardization and the reluctance of some states to provide detailed information on arms brokering and actual exports continue to hinder comprehensive understanding and effective monitoring of the international arms trade.