New Attempts to Change Arms Sales Policy, Same Old Problems

Jordan CohenUnited States Representatives Pramila Jayapal (D ‑WA) and Barbara Lee (D‑CA) recently introduced a resolution that calls for a massive change to U.S. foreign policy. Rather than focus on military tools such as troops, interoperability drills, and weapons sales, the representatives want one centered around diplomacy and cooperation.The legislation lacks specifics, but it raises interesting issues about weapons sales. It argues for a transformation in U.S. military aid and weapons transfers policy and says that these tools should only be for governments that are not corrupt and do not abuse human rights.In the Cato Institute ’s2021 Arms Sales Risk Index, we identify these problems as two of our four vectors that create risk in weapons sales. These vectors are corruption, stability, human rights abuses, and conflict involvement.A blanket resolution stopping sales to countries that flag as risky on one of these measures, (like the one introduced by Representatives Jayapal and Lee) is noble. Yet, it is important to note that vague statements that try to limit risk in weapons sales often fail.Since 2000, three pieces of legislation have reduced the risk of weapons transfers. The most comprehensive piece of weapons sales legislation is theGolden Sentry Program introduced in 2001. This monitors government ‐​to‐​government arms transfers through the Department of Defense after delivery. Then, in 1997 Congress reduced the standard of proof neede...
Source: Cato-at-liberty - Category: American Health Authors: Source Type: blogs