2019-2020 National High School Debate Topic: Arms Sales: Overview

Introduction

By the 2010s and into the 2020s, the United States had the distinction of being the world’s largest exporter of weapons. Indeed, arms sales grew steadily throughout this period: the US share of all global arms exports increased from 33 percent in 2013–17 to 40 percent in 2018–22. The arms sector's economic and military impact has brought significant bipartisan support within the US government. For instance, both the presidential administrations of Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Joe Biden oversaw major international weapons deals. However, the issue has also consistently drawn much controversy and debate.

For some, arms sales are a sign of the nation’s continued economic superiority and a vital means to ensure international stability. Supporters argue that providing weapons to US allies allows those allies to maintain stability in volatile areas like the Middle East without direct American intervention. They also state that arms sales—and the ability to restrict or refuse those sales, if needed—can help the US influence the foreign policy decisions of other nations. Furthermore, supporters point to the economic benefits from military equipment sales, whether directly coordinated by the US government or simply through American defense companies. Supporters of strategic arms sales acknowledge that the US competes as a weapons supplier against countries like Russia or China, and they point out that restricting sales could diminish US influence while enriching the coffers of other potentially hostile superpowers.

For others, however, arms sales are little more than a cynical financial interest couched as support for allies and national security. Critics argue that the benefits of arms sales are overstated, while the human and strategic costs are nearly incalculable. Many components of the weapons sold to foreign nations are made abroad, even if assembled or sold by American companies, undermining any domestic economic advantage. Skeptics suggest that arms sales also tend to further enrich those already in power, rather than benefit all Americans. Opponents also note that once arms have left the United States, there is no assurance that they will not end up in the hands of bad actors—including those working directly against American interests. For some observers, selling weapons to anyone is ethically dubious, given their implication of violence.

Understanding the Discussion

Arms Export Control Act (AECA): Passed in 1976, a federal law that gives the president the authority to negotiate arms sales with congressional oversight over a designated threshold.

Arms sales: The sales of military weapons, equipment, and services.

Human rights: Basic rights and freedoms generally considered fundamental for all human beings.

Iran-Contra affair: A secret deal in which the US government traded arms with Iran in exchange for hostages and also diverted funds to support rebel forces in Nicaragua. The discovery of this scheme and subsequent public hearings caused a damaging scandal for the presidency of Ronald Reagan.

Risk assessment: A systematic and logical plan to evaluate the possible risks involved in a decision or activity.

History

The role of the United States as a major international arms supplier has its origins in World War I. During the period of that war when the US remained neutral, from August 1914 to March 1917, over $2 billion in war material and weaponry was exported to Europe. Just after the war, in 1920, the US accounted for more than half of international arms exports. However, national sentiment turned against arms manufacturers as they were accused of spreading misinformation about the war to spur sales.

In 1934, in response to increasing evidence of conspiracy between American and European arms manufacturers to instigate international conflict, the US Senate established the Special Committee Investigating the Munitions Industry, headed by Senator Gerald P. Nye. The Nye Committee concluded that the arms industry had used bribery and misinformation to encourage buyers to outspend one another. The investigation did not lead to legal action, but the US Munitions Board was established as a result and charged with regulating international arms sales. In 1935, with tensions in Europe climbing once again, the Neutrality Act of 1935 established an arms embargo on warring nations. Several additional neutrality acts were established in the following years.

With the outbreak of World War II in 1939, restrictions on arms sales gradually gave way to various programs that allowed for loans of weapons and equipment to American allies and sales of weapons directly from American ports. The neutrality acts, substantially weakened, became completely irrelevant in December 1941 when the US joined the war. By the end of the World War II in 1945, over $11 billion in weapons and equipment had been sent to foreign countries.

The subsequent Cold War spurred massive investment in new weaponry. Both the US and the Soviet Union provided arms to countries in their spheres of influence, who in turn often fought proxy wars backed by the two superpowers. Despite some political misgivings—famously including President Dwight D. Eisenhower's 1961 warning about the so-called military-industrial complex—the US used weapons sales as a key element in its strategy to contain the spread of Communism and to influence foreign conflicts without direct involvement. By the 1960s the US had begun to see Southeast Asia as the latest battleground with Communism. Major military aid programs were implemented, ostensibly to avoid direct military action while halting left-wing insurgency. In Vietnam, arms and equipment proved insufficient, however, and military advisers and then US troops were deployed. The war in Vietnam instilled in many Americans a deep distrust of government and a conviction that the US should not involve itself in conflicts overseas. The war also increased public skepticism of weapons sales as a foreign policy strategy, leading to increased oversight efforts regarding such sales. The reluctance to send troops abroad, however, sometimes encouraged weapons sales as a lesser measure.

In the 1970s President Richard Nixon articulated the idea that it was better to aid foreign countries by sending arms and economic help than to involve the US as a primary party in a foreign conflict. This meant arms sales to not only Asia, but to the Middle East, as Nixon sought to fill the gap left by the British withdrawal from the Persian Gulf in 1971, determining that Saudi Arabia and Iran were the best options to stabilize the area. In Iran, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ordered $20 billion of arms from the US between 1970 and 1978, an enormous military buildup for a developing country. The Nixon administration, attracted to the economic benefits of booming arms sales, approved Iran for the sales of some extremely sophisticated equipment, which required the highest level of clearance.

The scale of arms sales to Iran, as well as reports of bribery and shady dealings, alarmed many Americans. In response, Congress placed additional checks on the sale of military equipment and weapons abroad. In 1976 it passed the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), which formalized the role of the executive branch in negotiating and approving arms deals, but specified that Congress could veto arms sales worth more than a certain threshold value. The act also required advance notice of pending agreements, including completion of a risk assessment, and restricted transfers of weapons to third parties. After the AECA was established, several high-profile cases have focused further attention on arms sales. Between 1985 and 1987 the Reagan administration used clandestine arms sales to Iran, then under an arms embargo, to fund rebel activities in Nicaragua. However, the resulting scandal, known as the Iran-Contra affair, did not result in further restrictions on the president’s ability to negotiate arms agreements.

After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, arms sales that had been impossible because of ideological conflicts were made available. The economic impact of widespread arms sales was touted for the first time in official economic policy by President Bill Clinton, who approved a then-record $36 billion in sales in 1993 alone.

Arms Sales Today

The US remained a major weapons exporter in the twenty-first century. In the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the administrations of both Republican president George W. Bush and Democratic president Barack Obama approved arms sales to various nations in the name of supporting the global war on terror. However, the risk assessment process that the AECA had put in place to ensure that countries with poor human rights records and ongoing conflicts would be ineligible to purchase arms was increasingly weakened. Unstable or controversial states whose assistance was needed to fight terrorism were considered an acceptable risk, including nations previously banned from arms sales. Notably, sales to Afghanistan and Iraq increased exponentially after Western-backed governments were installed in both countries. Arms sales to key strategic allies of the US in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates, also increased steadily despite.

This growth continued under President Donald Trump. Indeed, the Trump administration made arms sales an economic priority, celebrating deals publicly and actively encouraging the defense industry through diplomatic advocacy and loans. In May 2019 the Trump administration pushed through a Saudi arms sale, circumventing Congress by invoking emergency powers. Under Trump, the US also acted on several projects suspended by the previous administration over concerns about possible consequences. These included sending military airplanes to Bahrain and Nigeria. Meanwhile, some indicators suggested that the American public was once again concerned with the ballooning rate of arms sales. For instance, a 2019 Chicago Council on Global Affairs survey found that 70 percent of Americans believed selling weapons to other countries makes the US less safe, while just 9 percent felt it makes the US safer.

While the administration of President Joe Biden reversed many Trump-era policies after taking office in 2021, arms sales proved largely immune to changing political winds. The US Department of State reported that arms sales to other governments saw a sharp year-to-year increase of 49 percent in fiscal year 2022. Key drivers behind this increase included the Russian invasion of Ukraine and ongoing geopolitical tensions with China. By the end of 2022, the US share of all global arms exports over the previous five years had increased while Russia and China's shares decreased substantially.

These essays and any opinions, information, or representations contained therein are the creation of the particular author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of EBSCO Information Services.

Bibliography

‌Edmondson, Catie, and Edward Wong. “State Department Defends Saudi Arms Sales before Hostile House Panel.” The New York Times, 12 June 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/06/12/us/politics/arms-sales-saudi-arabia.html. Accessed 8 Dec. 2019.

‌Hartung, William. “Trump Policy and Trends in U.S. Arms Sales.” Reinventing Peace, World Peace Foundation, Tufts University, 21 June 2019, sites.tufts.edu/reinventingpeace/2019/06/21/trump-policy-and-trends-in-u-s-arms-sales. Accessed 8 Dec. 2019.

“The Neutrality Acts, 1930s.” Office of the Historian, US Dept. of State, history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/neutrality-acts.‌ Accessed 11 Dec. 2023.

Reichmann, Kelsey. “How Do Americans Feel about US Arms Sales? Not Great.” Defense News, 12 July 2019, www.defensenews.com/global/the-americas/2019/07/12/how-do-americans-feel-about-us-arms-sales-not-great. Accessed 8 Dec. 2019.

Robiou, Marcia. “What You Need to Know about Trump’s $8 Billion Saudi Arms Deal.” Frontline, 16 July 2019, www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/saudi-arabia-arms-deal-trump-what-to-know. Accessed 8 Dec. 2019.‌

‌Stone, Mike. "US Arms Exports Up 49% in Fiscal 2022." Reuters, 25 Jan. 2023, www.reuters.com/world/us/us-arms-exports-up-11-fiscal-2022-official-says-2023-01-25/. Accessed 8 Dec. 2023.

Thompson, Loren. "As Foreign Demand for US Weapons Surges, Biden Adm. Moves to Expedite Sales." Forbes, 6 Oct. 2023, www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2023/10/06/as-foreign-demand-for-us-weapons-surges-biden-adm-moves-to-expedite-sales/?sh=7ac533a66887. Accessed 8 Dec. 2023.

Thrall, Trevor A., and Caroline Dorminey. “Risky Business: The Role of Arms Sales in U.S. Foreign Policy.” Cato Institute, 13 Mar. 2018, www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/risky-business-role-arms-sales-us-foreign-policy. Accessed 8 Dec. 2019.

‌“U.S. Arms Sales and Defense Trade.” Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, US Dept. of State, 21 May 2019, www.state.gov/u-s-arms-sales-and-defense-trade. Accessed 18 Dec. 2019.