Syria and the Global Arms Trade

In the run up to Christmas we are all frantically buying presents for loved ones, ensuring deadlines are complete so we can avoid thinking about them, and becoming a little more focused on ourselves and our families. 

There is nothing wrong with that. In fact we deserve a break! Or certainly I will admit I need one!

But, as we prepare to celebrate another Christmas and hunker down it was strange to hear that yesterday the BBC launched a series of reports on the Syrian conflict to mark its third year - almost like a birthday? Oddly it seems like only yesterday that fifteen children in Deraa wrote anti-government graffiti and the subsequent violence started.

After three years of fighting, what can we infer from the situation? 

Well it is rather stale… in fact it is a stalemate.

That does not mean that fighting is not occurring but rather that rebels will take one area for it to be only retaken by government forces and vice versa.

Sustained firefights on the streets of Aleppo. Credit: James Lawer Duggan

Concerning the BBC report it concluded that the influence of external powers will be the deciding factor in this conflict; an observation that could be drawn from most, if not all, armed conflicts in this present age. Cheers for that BBC… we do indeed live in a globalised world so external powers are bound to take an interest and have an influence.

Conversely, in  studies on the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) major scholars in democratisation such as Diamond, Linz and Lipset (1996) exclude the MENA  states from their studies as they “lack much democratic experience, and most appear to have little prospect of transition to even semi-democracy”. This lack of democracy simply makes this region even more interesting to external powers as it is so volatile. Volatility means vast amounts of money and where there is money there is bound to be trouble.

So, let us have a quick look at how have the external powers influenced Syria recently?

• They have given non-lethal aid to the Free Syrian Army (FSA) but due to the Islamic Front taking FSA bases in Bab al-Hawa the aid has stopped to this region.
• Aid for refugees and those suffering from the now crippling winter has been provided. Though it is risky for aid workers to complete their jobs.

This aid seems rather cautious and concerned with the people of Syria’s welfare. However, underneath this bubble of aid lies a more sinister trade, the arms trade. If external powers are not involved in this then… well we all know they are.

So what makes weapons profitable?

• Their durability.
• The ease with which actors can locate ammunition. Obviously finding ammunition for an AK47 is easier than another rarer or outdated rifle. 
• They are fungible and interchangeable.
• They retain their value
• Conflict seems to be a constant at this present moment so someone will always want to buy them

Read this article here for a more in-depth understanding and an overview of the arms trade.

Vast stockpiles of weapons in unstable states. See this article on the arms trade in Latin America.

Who is supporting who?

• Russia and Iran are supplying the Assad regime
• External powers such as America are not explicitly trading arms but are facilitating the transfer of arms from Libya to Syria rebels. The logic is that the more weapons fired at Assad means fewer weapons in the hands of militants in North Africa. Sound logic.

Furthermore, if you watch ‘Holidays in the Danger Zone - The Violent Coast: Liberia and Sierra Leone’ by Ben Anderson (I would recommend his documentaries) about sixteen minutes in he finds an RPG-7 provided by a British Arms Manufacturer despite the arms embargo on Liberia. Thus, as Western powers attempt to reduce conflict in developing states it is worth considering how they might be sustaining them or profiteering from them.

Nonetheless, they are playing a game which all foreign powers play from Pakistan to China to Russia and consequently for them to be involved, no matter how irresponsible, might help to prevent certain powers from dominating the international sphere.

I would argue that all should be aware of this practice but that preventing the arms trade presents a conundrum needing international cooperation. Calling for the West to stop trading arms could lead, however inhuman this appears, to worse atrocities. If both sides are armed then a realist state of deadlock may emerge. Though, if this is broken after sustained vertical proliferation, and with more weapons available, the conflict could be prolonged. It is a difficult situation.  

Therefore, as we spend Christmas buying lots of presents lets us take a minute to think about the way in which armed forces throughout the world are able to buy their ‘presents’ this Christmas. I urge you to consider the arguments, research the subject and form your own opinions on this important matter.

Resources used (if not already linked):

Diamond, L., Linz, J. J. and Lipset, S. M. (1995) Politics in Developing Countries: Comparing Experiences with Democracy. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.