Articolo molto interessante sul commercio di armi.

Lo sapevate che il 2006 rischia di essere l'anno in cui la spesa militare mondiale raggiunge i livelli più alti della storia?
L'articolo riportato di seguito riporta diverse considerazioni interessanti, che riassumo per chi non potesse leggerlo in inglese o non ne avesse voglia (per chi può comunque lo consiglio vivamente).
1) l'ammontare speso per l'acquisto di armi è 15 volte quello destinato agli aiuti internazionali;
2) gli embargo sulle armi che così pomposamente vengono applicati dalle potenze internazionali ai Paesi "pericolosi" vengono violati da quelle stesse potenze in un modo molto semplice: non si forniscono le armi, ma i componenti per produrle. Ad esempio, sia l'Unione Europea che gli Stati Uniti e il Canada hanno attivato da tempo un embargo sull'esportazione di armi verso la Cina: tuttavia, i nuovi elicotteri d'attacco Z-10 posseduti da pechino sono costruiti con componenti provenienti da aziende, italiane, inglesi, americane, candesi, francesi e tedesche.
Ma la domanda inquietante, e non retorica, che sorge leggendo questo articolo è: cosa se ne farà, il mondo, di così tante armi? Fortunatamente negli ultimi due anni si è assistito ad una riduzione generalizzata dei conflitti armati, specialmente in Africa. Tuttavia, le notizie sul commercio di armi ci dicono che la pace è sempre più fragile. Chi e perché sta preparando nuove guerre?
Un'ultima annotazione: l'articolo fa spesso riferimento ad un ampio rapporto sul commercio di armi pubblicato recentemente da una coalizione di ONG internazionali. Chi volesse darci un'occhiata può cliccare qui.

Richard Norton-Taylor
Tuesday October 3, 2006
The Guardian

Worldwide spending on weapons is expected to reach record levels thisyear at a time when the arms industry is increasingly able to avoidexport controls, human rights and aid agencies say in a reportpublished yesterday.By the end of the year, military spending is estimated to reach$1,058bn (£561bn), about 15 times the amount spent on internationalaid, say Amnesty, Oxfam, and the International Action Network on SmallArms (Iansa).The figure is higher than the cold war record reached in 1987-88 of$1,034bn in today's prices, they claim, adding that last year the US,Russia, Britain, France and Germany accounted for an estimated 82% ofall arms transfers.Other countries are emerging as major exporters. Brazil, India,Israel, Singapore, South Africa, and South Korea have arms firms inthe top 100, Amnesty says.In their report, Arms without Borders, the agencies claim US, EU, andCanadian companies can get round arms regulations by selling weaponcomponents and subcontracting arms manufacturing to companiesoverseas. Weapons, including attack helicopters and combat trucks, arebeing assembled from foreign components and manufactured under licencein countries including China, Egypt, India, Israel and Turkey.The report shows how these or similar weapons have ended up inColombia, Sudan and Uzbekistan where they are reported to have beenused against civilians.The report says that the EU has an arms embargo against China, and theUS and Canada have banned the sale of armed helicopters to Beijing.Yet China's new Z-10 attack helicopter would not fly without weaponsparts and technology from Anglo-Italian company (Augusta Westland),the Canadian firm Pratt & Whitney Canada) a US company (LordCorporation) and a Franco-German company (Eurocopter), it says. Thereis no suggestion any of the companies are breaking the law.The report points out that China has previously sold attackhelicopters to a number of countries including Sudan, which is under afull EU arms embargo.The Apache helicopter, used by Israel in the Lebanon conflict, is madefrom 6,000 parts manufactured worldwide, including the UK, theNetherlands and Ireland. Under the EU's code of conduct, thosecountries should refuse to export attack helicopters directly toIsrael, the agencies argue in their report.Last year, Uzbek security forces fired on demonstrators, killinghundreds. The Uzbek army used military Land Rovers. Around 70% oftheir parts were British. They were sent "flat pack" to Turkey, wherethey were made into military vehicles. The vehicles were then suppliedto the Uzbek government.The report says the government had no control over the Land Rover dealbecause the vehicles were not converted into military vehicles inBritain. Again there is no suggestion the company broke any law.The UN has just opened its annual session on arms control. The generalassembly is to vote on a British-backed proposal for an arms trade treaty. Human rights groups say the treaty should impose export controls on components of weapons systems as well as complete weapons. Controls should also cover foreign licensing agreements, they say.