National Arms Control Commission: briefing

Meeting report

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
25 February 2004
NATIONAL ARMS CONTROL COMMISSION: BRIEFING

Chairperson: Mr P Jordan (ANC)

Relevant documents:
Committee Annual Report 2003
National Convention on Arms Control Bill Act of 2000
Regulation of Foreign Military Assistance Act [No. 15 of 1998]


SUMMARY
The Chairperson of the National Arms Control Commission briefed the Committee on the role and history of the NACC as well as the nine principles guiding government policy on arms sales. South Africa had been the first country to pass legislation forbidding foreign military assistance in the form of the Regulation of Foreign Military Assistance Act in 1998, and there had been no breaches since.

The Committee Annual Report was reviewed and certain amendments proposed.

MINUTES
At this last meeting of the Parliamentary term, the Chairperson congratulated the Committee on the way it had moved beyond party differences to build consensus about a SA foreign policy that supported democracy, transparency and a safer world. Mr W Makande (ANC) and Mr C Eglin (DA) expressed appreciation for the manner in which the Chair had led the Committee with an even hand.

Mr Eglin continued however that the Committee needed to receive reports from the Department at an earlier stage. Parliamentary staff had generally shown an unhelpful attitude. Mr B Geldenhuys (NNP) agreed and added that he hoped Mr Jordan would be reinstated as Chair in the next Parliament.

Mr Geldenhuys requested elaboration on the unhelpfulness of Parliamentary staff. The Parliamentary Liaison Officer, Mr H Lambrechts, has been extremely helpful. He was about to go to serve in Australia - such comments could affect his career. Mr Jordan answered that he had been referring to the previous Committee Clerk. Ms Hajaig asked whether this was the same person who had been transferred from other committees, and if so, something should be done about this.

Mr A Mokoena added that the report needed to be more specific to clarify issues and to point out pitfalls. It was also important to acknowledge the help they had received. It should be recorded that the preceding clerk had left much to be desired.

Moving through the Annual Report, Mr M Ramgobin (ANC) suggested that they remove the words 'Vision', 'Mission' etc from the Mandate. Mr Jordan stated that this was simply extrapolated from the format suggested for all committees.

Ms F Hajaig (ANC) suggested that NEPAD should be mentioned boldly, in conjunction with the AU.

Mr J Seremane (DA) referred to the UK visit, stating that in future, Parliament should understand the budget required for the Committee to function comprehensively and undertake the necessary overseas visits.

Mr Jordan answered that people seemed to understand when he raised the Committee's travelling requirements, but their subsequent actions belied this.

Mr Makoena asked why this was the only Parliament in the world that had a 'mini committee' juxtaposed to the Committee, referring to the International Relations Committee.

Mr Geldenhuys questioned the Committee's unused budget. The International Relations Committee stated that any tour by Parliament that involved more than nine hours of travelling, was allowed to fly Business instead of Economy class, why had the rules not been adhered to for the Committee's recent flight to China. Why was there a different attitude towards travel for the Foreign Affairs Committee compared with the International Relations Committee?

Mr Jordan answered that he had not intended to get into this level of detail and wanted to treat the subject delicately.

Ms Hajaig asked that the Committee's relationship with the Department be expanded in the Report, such as the issue of receipt of late reports. Last year there had been a meeting on Africa and Asia, about which they were neither informed nor invited to. This was the only time the Committee had time to engage with foreign diplomats.

Mr Eglin requested that the inter-relationship between the African Union, International Relations and Foreign Affairs Committees be added to the outstanding issues in the Report.

Mr Jordan accepted the Committee Report as amended, noting that most of the changes related to the Chairperson's comments. Members would receive the final report by Friday.

Minister's briefing on the Arms Control Bill
Mr Kader Asmal, Chairperson of the National Arms Control Commission (and Minister of Education) felt that he should have been able to present a joint report to the Committees of Defence and Foreign Affairs, but the current confidentiality clause prevented this. He outlined the country categorisation regarding eligibility for arms endorsed by the apartheid regime, and then explained the current situation. In August 1995, the National Arms Control Commission (NACC) had replaced all ineffective structures and in 2002, a statutory body of Ministers was formed that reported to the Cabinet, and which was chaired by the Minister of Education. The government had adopted nine guiding principles to determine a country's eligibility for arms exports. These included considering each application individually; safeguarding international allies; avoiding internal repression and regional conflicts; not endangering peace or introducing destabilising elements; avoiding spending disproportionate amounts on arms sales; avoiding embargoes; avoiding contributions to criminals; looking to the inherent right to self-defence and political independence, and avoiding the re-export of arms to third parties. SA was the first country to pass the Foreign Military Assistance Act in 1998 forbidding all kinds of military assistance. There had been no breach of the Act since.

Discussion
Ms Hajaig said it was an established principle not to sell arms to states engaged in interstate conflict. In Algeria there was an intense ongoing military conflict between the government and its opponents. She feared that South African arms sold to Algeria may be used to militarily resolve this problem.

Mr Asmal said the criteria used to evaluate the sale of arms were not self executing. The government had to use its discretion beyond the criteria expressed. In reality these principles were often in contrast and other factors had to be employed to reach decisions. South Africa was aware of the possibility of "proportionality in battle", that is, that the Algerian state may be tempted to reciprocate the violent actions of its opponents. South Africa previously stopped selling arms to Sri Lanka because it learnt that a special element within its military was allowed to operate with fewer legal constraints than usual. He said South Africa sold arms to Algeria not because of its previous support but to protect their national integrity

Mr J Sithole ANC said de-mining equipment had a potential military application to clear mines placed by one's opponents. He asked whether South Africa was willing to sell de-mining equipment to Sudan given the renewed hope and prospects for peace in that nation.

Mr Asmal said South Africa would consider selling de-mining equipment to Sudan when peace was established. De-mining operations were very expensive and technical thereforethe UN often assisted poor nations in this regard.

Ms Hajaig asked whether South Africa was selling arms to Israel.

Mr Sithole asked whether South Africa had any incomplete arms transactions to Israel and if so would South Africa consider their cessation.

Mr Asmal said South Africa had a total arms embargo against Israel and that was how it should be. South Africa had ceased arms sales to Israel since 1998 with the start of the first 'Intifadah'.

Mr Makanda said there were newspaper reports claiming that South African armaments sold to Rwanda had been used and operated by South African personnel during Rwanda's incursion into the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Mr Asmal said many stories were planted in the media that had no basis in reality. South Africa had sold only four Armoured Personnel Carriers to Rwanda - hardly sufficient to transport the 7000 soldiers involved in that operation, the 500km to 600km distance to the DRC. The Rwandans had obviously found transportation through other avenues. There was also a story in newspapers alleging that South Africa had sold enriched uranium to Iraq yet when it was refuted there was no thunderous denouncement of South Africa being victimised. South Africa was accused without proof and then the onus of proof was put at South Africa's door to refute, this could never be done 100%. Only the "chattering classes at the foot of Table Mountain" and other areas indulged in such stories. Foreign Relations was a very complex matter and newspapers should not simply pick up foreign stories without verifying them first.

Mr Sithole said it had been reported that South Africa had sold arms to the US and UK on the eve of their invasion of Iraq. Was there any truth to these reports?

Mr Asmal replied that the fulfilment of Arms Contracts takes time often up to three years. There had been no requests for arms immediately prior to the invasion. The United Nations Security Council has recognised the US invasion of Iraq, but South Africa still treated Iraq as an area of conflict that is, not to permit arms sales. Two or three American soldiers and an unknown number of Iraqis were killed daily in Iraq. Iraq was a nation under occupation and as such the United Nations Convention regarding occupied territories applied to Iraq exactly as it applied to the occupied Gaza strip and West Bank. The occupying force was responsible for the provision of general services and amenities to the occupied population. He emphasised that South Africa took its own independent decision concerning its Foreign Relations.

The meeting was adjourned.