TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/031891/0318006.000

Text File | 1992-08-28 | 5.5 KB | 120 lines

                                                                                WORLD, Page 58

ARMAMENTS

Choose Your Weapons


Will hope of reducing Middle East arsenals be doomed by a
shopping spree for arms, especially those showcased in the
gulf?

By RICHARD LACAYO -- Reported by Michael Duffy/Washington and
Jon D. Hull/Jerusalem


    Any postwar calculation of power in the Middle East must now
reckon with two contradictory axioms. One is that most
countries in the area support some form of regional arms
control. The other is that they all want billions of dollars'
worth of additional weapons for themselves. Though the trauma
of facing down Saddam's war machine made clear the folly of
Western and Soviet arms sales to Iraq, it also left Arab
nations and Israel no less apt to conclude that happiness --
or at least security -- is a warm gun.

    As he makes his swing through the Middle East this week,
U.S. Secretary of State James Baker brings a further
contradiction with him. In a region that is the most heavily
armed in the world, the U.S. would like to see smaller arsenals
on all sides. But Washington is poised to rearm its friends
heavily, in some cases as the payoff for their membership in
the alliance against Iraq. It doesn't help matters that Western
arms dealers are ready to capitalize on a war that sometimes
seemed like a giant trade show for smart bombs, Patriot missiles
and F-16s. As the eager buyers reach out to the no less eager
sellers, the chance for meaningful arms control slips away.

    For now, the Bush Administration seems content to discourage
chemical, biological and nuclear arsenals while assisting the
conventional buildup. Last week it tightened Commerce
Department regulations restricting the export of materials that
could be used to produce chemical and biological weapons and
missile-delivery systems. The new rules also apply to "dual
use" chemicals and equipment, which have legitimate commercial
uses but might serve in making chemical and biological weapons
as well.

    Two weeks ago, however, the White House informed Congress
of its plans to sell advanced weapons worth $1.6 billion to
Egypt, including 46 F-16 warplanes and 80 air-to-ground
missiles. The Administration describes the sale as the final
part of a 10-year series that was an element of the deal in
which Egypt agreed to the 1978 Camp David peace accords. The
White House has also submitted a classified report informing
Congress that it is considering more than $18 billion in new
military sales to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates,
Bahrain, Egypt, Israel and Turkey. Saudi Arabia alone would get
a $10 billion wish list that includes 25 F-15 fighters, 36
Apache attack helicopters, 2,400 Maverick missiles and 235 M1A1
tanks. For American defense contractors, these sales promise
an escape from the gloomy fate spelled out in the budget
package adopted by Congress last fall, in which U.S. defense
spending is slated to shrink 25% over the next five years.

    Israel is scheduled to receive more than $3 billion in
military aid from the U.S. this year. Meanwhile, its supporters
in Congress will be closely watching any sales to Arab
countries of weapons that might be turned against Tel Aviv or
Haifa. But the alliance between the U.S. and Arab states during
the war against Iraq has complicated matters. Last fall Israeli
officials remained uncharacteristically silent when the U.S.
provided Saudi Arabia with a multibillion-dollar infusion of
advanced arms. Though pro-Israel lobbyists do not yet plan to
oppose the sale to the Saudis, they are beginning to raise
questions. "The Iraqi military machine no longer exists," says
one. "Yet we're still willing to sell the same amount of stuff
to the Saudis."

    There are signs that Israel, hard pressed by the cost of
absorbing hundreds of thousands of Soviet Jewish immigrants,
is open to arms-limitation proposals that would help keep down
its military outlays, which have already shrunk about 15% in
the past three years. Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir has
proposed a regional limitation on "nonconventional" weapons --
presumably meaning chemical and biological -- as a
confidence-building measure between Israel and the Arab states.
But so long as he gives no sign that Israel would bargain away
its nuclear arsenal, Arab nations are unlikely to agree.

    The Bush Administration knows that the U.S. cannot impose
conventional-arms limitations on its own and that coordinated
restraint by the major arms-supplying nations is essential. But
Western defense industries, particularly in Europe, have become
heavily reliant on exports to finance research and development
of new weapons systems. France, which once sent a third of its
weapons exports to Iraq, is seeking new customers. Britain
hopes to sell Challenger tanks and Tornado aircraft to Saudi
Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

    Though Soviet weapons were the duds of the gulf war, the
Kremlin is also in the market to make arms sales. During a
visit to Moscow last week, British Prime Minister John Major
appealed to Mikhail Gorbachev for his cooperation. The Soviet
leader is reported to have intimated that he would agree to an
embargo against Iraq only for as long as Saddam remained in
power. That may be the best anyone can hope for. Every major
war in the Middle East has been followed by a major escalation
in the regional arms race. This time, too, visions of a new
world order may be no match for business as usual.