W’s terrible legacy

By Tyler Wolfe

With only a few months left until the inauguration of the 44th president of the United States, George W. Bush undoubtedly has legacy on his mind. All political leaders exiting public life leave a legacy– a synopsis of the successes or failures of their time in office. The current American president can look to his handling of the September 2001 terrorist attacks and the nonpartisan coming-together of the nation which followed as a high point for his presidency (though, obviously not for the nation). Others, however, will point out countless shortcomings including the handling of Hurricane Katrina, the invasion and occupation of Iraq and most recently the seeming collapse of the economy.

There is, though, another legacy that this administration will leave to the international community, one which will only begin to be felt in the years to come, but has the potential to fuel future wars and to start a new arms race. The United States has reaffirmed its place as the number one exporter of weapons throughout the world with a staggering increase in 2008.

The Bush Administration is pushing through foreign weapons deals at a pace far exceeding the recent global norm. According to the latest Congressional Study, the United States has finalized agreements for the sale of $32 billion (all figures U.S. dollars) worth of military technology so far in the 2008 fiscal year. This is nearly triple the amount of weapons supplied by the United States just three years ago, when they arranged for $12 billion in similar military exports. These large conventional arms include items such as fighter jets, tanks, missiles and ships, but do not take into account small arms such as rifles and ammunition. To further illustrate the rapid growth rate, one needs to consider that in 2005, combined worldwide sales reached a total of $44.2 billion– just $12 billion more than the 2008 American figure.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reports the United States accounted for 31 per cent of arms sales between 2003 and 2007; followed by Russia (25 per cent), Germany (10 per cent), France (nine per cent) and the United Kingdom (four per cent). In 2008, Russia will set a post-Soviet record for arms exports, which will exceed $8 billion for the fiscal year. While this figure falls far short of the American total, it is worrisome nonetheless, showcasing that the Americans are not the only ones setting new export records.

Why then the large swell in U.S. exports? Part of the explanation can be found in the tense global environment. With fears of potential Iranian and North Korean aggression, for example, neighbouring states are looking to supplement their current arsenals. Others states have been shocked and awed by the show of American fire power in Iraq and Afghanistan and are looking to add high-tech laser guided and precision munitions.

This raises the question of whether flooding the international market with advanced weaponry is the best tactic to create stability and peace. While supporters of this concept would argue that the increased ability of states to defend themselves will cause would-be aggressors to think twice, recent evidence points to the contrary. This summer Georgia, supplied with modern American weapons, was brazen enough to launch an offensive into South Ossetia, which they knew would provoke a Russian response.

The Bush Administration is also very keen to sell weapon systems to those countries it sees as vital to the “War on Terror.” Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan represent the first, fourth and fifth largest purchasers of American arms between 2006 and 2008, respectively. Yet the stability of these three states leaves much to be desired. Less than 20 years ago the United States was supplying the Afghan mujahedeen with weapons to fight the Soviets. Now these weapons are being used by the Taliban against the United States and NATO and it’s far from certain the current Afghan state will survive. If it collapses, these weapons could once again fall into enemy hands.

The $32 billion figure for 2008 represents agreements that have been made between the American administration and foreign governments, but it will be years before these weapons are actually delivered. In the meantime, these agreements are likely to cause a new style of arms race– one in which the major arms producers, particularly the United States and Russia, attempt to outsell each other at the expense of international stability.

Unfortunately, it appears the idea of disarmament or reductions in armaments has been rendered null and void. The world is hungry for weapons and the weapon producers are only too happy to oblige. A world where peace and stability depend increasingly on the threat your neighbour is able to pose is a world forever on the brink of war. Long after Bush has checked out of the White House, this is a legacy for which we will have his administration to thank.

Leave a comment