I agree with you when you say it is not that simple. It would need follow through and clear understanding of each country's unique situation (and nothing could be truer than your observation that to refer to Africa as one entity is entirely misleading.) But a beginning is needed, and to my mind, arms limitation must work alongside education and support, or the latter has very little chance of developing freely.
However, my reason for commenting on this post is your comment about arms dealing. I really don't think that stopping dealing arms to them would stop the wars - they'd just make their own arms.
But they are well behind in terms of technology; if you want to make state of the art (hell, even crappy) munitions, you need to invest in factories and the like; you need to invest time. It is a much longer term prospect than buying the ready-made and the best. Short term victories are much harder without other countries' investment. Look at the amounts being bought from the US and UK; no-one lacking the necessary infrastructure is going to make those in a hurry.
Either those in those countries who already make/sell such things would enlarge their businesses,
From what we see, it is not a homegrown business. Perhaps there is a booming cottage industry, but no-one wants knocked up home-made rubbish, or they wouldn't be chucking their cash at international arms dealers in the first place!
or some of those over here who sell to them would see their profit taken away by whatever embargoes are put in place, and move their businesses to somewhere that they can peddle their wares.
Doubtless first world companies could move, but the difficulties begin to pile up, profits begin to stagger...let's make life inconvenient for them!
I just don't think it's as simple as stopping dealing arms to them - if they're going to fight they will do it with or without our assistance.
Then let's espouse some principles and leave them to do it without; Gunmen become less trigger-happy when ammo is expensive and parts hard to replace. A torture session can do the job of 'persuasion' well enough with a bucket of water, let's not add to the torturer's bag of tricks by selling them electric batons.
In the end, everyone wants to be part of the world market. Consider Turkey, a country with a magnificent culture, an astonishing history, and a terrible human rights record. Turkey is working on improving that record because of the nation's desire to access the markets of Europe. Is this not an example of the positive power of money?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zaluzianskya and ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
skylark_photos
Sorry for double post, used wrong word!
Date: 2005-07-03 04:14 pm (UTC)However, my reason for commenting on this post is your comment about arms dealing. I really don't think that stopping dealing arms to them would stop the wars - they'd just make their own arms.
But they are well behind in terms of technology; if you want to make state of the art (hell, even crappy) munitions, you need to invest in factories and the like; you need to invest time. It is a much longer term prospect than buying the ready-made and the best. Short term victories are much harder without other countries' investment. Look at the amounts being bought from the US and UK; no-one lacking the necessary infrastructure is going to make those in a hurry.
Either those in those countries who already make/sell such things would enlarge their businesses,
From what we see, it is not a homegrown business. Perhaps there is a booming cottage industry, but no-one wants knocked up home-made rubbish, or they wouldn't be chucking their cash at international arms dealers in the first place!
or some of those over here who sell to them would see their profit taken away by whatever embargoes are put in place, and move their businesses to somewhere that they can peddle their wares.
Doubtless first world companies could move, but the difficulties begin to pile up, profits begin to stagger...let's make life inconvenient for them!
I just don't think it's as simple as stopping dealing arms to them - if they're going to fight they will do it with or without our assistance.
Then let's espouse some principles and leave them to do it without; Gunmen become less trigger-happy when ammo is expensive and parts hard to replace. A torture session can do the job of 'persuasion' well enough with a bucket of water, let's not add to the torturer's bag of tricks by selling them electric batons.
In the end, everyone wants to be part of the world market. Consider Turkey, a country with a magnificent culture, an astonishing history, and a terrible human rights record. Turkey is working on improving that record because of the nation's desire to access the markets of Europe. Is this not an example of the positive power of money?