SWBP: Arms Proliferation

Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems, 2007
a book I'm reading, Edited by Bjorn Lomborg,
Director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center
Ch. 11, Arms Proliferation, by J. Paul Dunne, U of W. England
Summary and Commentary

Kali has lots of arms....

I already wrote about this, in the SALW post. But this is even better, maybe.
I find it interesting that you can't spell 'proliferation' without 'pro-life'.
Weird.

Anyway, proliferation usually has related to nuclear arms, and it does in this chapter, too, but it also refers to biological and chemical weapons, and technologies, systems, and weapons, of any kind. It can be in quantity or quality, in the sense of more arms or more advanced arms.

The results of it can be increased probability of conflict, greater potential lethality and duration of that conflict, and an increased economic burden on countries, esp. developing ones.

It's hard to measure. There are illicit and small arms sales which go unrecorded, and the technology may be of more concern than the actual weapons. Lethality may not be reflected in price. Transparency is reduced due to the increasing internationalization of the industry. It's not just goods, but also services. Mercenary enterprise has corporatized into the Blackwater type stuff. Terrorists with i.e.d's (improvised explosive devices) and suicide bombers inflict asymmetric damages. Speaking of arms, a karate chop can be lethal. It's nuts.

Proliferation cost is a subset of military spending is a subset of total arms trade, just so that's clear.

There are 3 categories of weaponry: non-conventional, conventional, and SALW (small arms and light weapons).
1. Non-conventional is the big stuff, the WMD: ABC (atomic, bio, chem). Now, there's those airburst weapons, which are like small nukes, too. (It could be NBC, too, if you want to get crazy with the TV). Countries that have them pay minor costs, but the treaties, policing, and incentives to counter proliferation are expensive; then measures, if necessary, maybe military action, can result in catastrophe.
2. conventional weapons systems, like tanks, planes, ships, subs. The main suppliers are Russia and the USA. They provide defense, but also can give an advantage, which might start or escalate conflict. Arms races, and associated wasted expenditure, can also result.
3. these kill most people, unlike the larger categories which are used to project power. They're the main security concern in the developing world. 500,000 people a year, snuffed.

Costs of proliferation
a)Proliferation cost is a subset of military spending is a subset of total arms trade, just so that's clear.

b)Other costs of proliferation are the indirect economic effects on the economy, such as the opportunity cost of producing arms, or spending valuable capital on them. After the Cold War, military spending went down, and was there a cost to arms producers like us? There was local dependence, which research suggests will not be problematic, and indeed, with reallocation of gvt. resources, there is a 'peace dividend.'

c)Also, proliferation upsets strategic balances, which can create an increased probability of more lethal conflict, with domestic, neighbor, and wider international problems. Arms races increase conflict probability, and increase neighbor country arms expenditure.

Benefits
Security, prestige, an attempt at influence with exporters, money for corrupt elites. There are expectations for benefits to local industry from offset agreements that provide investment and technology transfer. (What is an offset agreement?)

Guess what? He says, and I quote, "There is also the issue of whether military security actually works, especially in the developing world."

I know I've got the plan the works. Keep reading my blog, folks.

His 5 solutions:
1. Nuke disarmament, and WMD non-proliferation programs

2. Conflict prevention measures (like economic sanctions and better resourced UN troops)
He sites Cranna, 1994 as having a useful package of conflict prevention policy initiatives.
He also sites Chalmers, 2004, which evaluates the cost effectiveness of different measures, and gives the number of 139.4B USD to resolve the conflict in Afghanistan.
The costs of this has a low of 2B USD and a high benefit of 1875B USD. Pretty cool, huh?
Maybe war isn't where the money's at, eh?

3. Counter arms-proliferation measures (dampen, or nullify, their impact)
This happens through diplomacy, sanctions, threats, and military action, (or a mix).
This would act as a deterrent, so the cost would decrease over time.
This one has a low cost of 10B USD and a high benefit of 1795B USD. Yes, it's cool.

4. Control the trade in conventional arms
There is a system, but it can be a lot better. Proposals already exist, of course. To make it more rigorous, an 'arms trade treaty' would determine the nature and degree of the arms trade, and assist in policing/enforcing arms export control policies. This would curtail the arms trade, get all countries to adopt a code of conduct, create greater transparency, reduce the use of landmines, and include a commitment to uphold human rights.

5. Tax arms transfers
The money from taxed arms exports would go to a development fund that reduces poverty and inequality.