[asia-apec 1281] Fwd: Military Role in Globalisation

[BAYAN]

FYI:

>>From: MichaelP <papadop at peak.org>
>>Subject: The Military's Role in Globalisation
>>
>>THE HAGUE, May 14 (IPS) - Wealthy countries negotiating international
>>trade and investment agreements are pushing for exemption clauses where
>>national security interests are concerned - but this is not for reasons of
>>security alone, independent analysts say.
>>
>>''It allows the maintenance of corporate subsidies through virtually
>>unlimited military spending,'' said Steven Staples, executive member of
>>the Canadian organisation, End the Arms Race.
>>
>>''Globalisation has created a new relationship between governments on the
>>one hand, and the corporations with their allies in the military on the
>>other,'' said Staples at a meeting on 'Demilitarising the Global Economy'
>>at the Hague Appeal for Peace.
>>
>>More than 4,000 delegates from around the world gathered this week at the
>>Hague marking the 100th anniversary of the 1899 Hague Conference, an
>>attempt by world leaders to push for world peace.
>>
>>The aerospace and defence industry, which includes some of the largest
>>transnational corporations in the world - such as Boeing, British
>>Aerospace and Aerospatiale - is heavily subsidised by western governments.
>>These subsidies are vital for the corporations to remain competitive on
>>the global market place, according to Staples.
>>
>>''Government research and military spending through grants, subsidies and
>>purchases of military aircraft provide a boost for the corporations and
>>enhance their competitive edge internationally,'' he explained.
>>
>>At the same time, the military, which relies on the aerospace and defence
>>industry for the advanced technology needed to gain technological
>>superiority in warfare, is feeling the effects of the worldwide decline in
>>defence spending.
>>
>>Ann Markusen, a specialist on military and defence expenditure at the
>>Rutgers University in the United States said that world military spending
>>has declined in the last decade.

>>However, although the overall global military spending has been declining,
>>spending continues to increase in some countries, particularly in the
>>Middle-East and South East Asia.
>>
>>Staples says there is a contradiction at play here: while Western
>>aerospace and defence corporation's rely on developing countries'
>>adherence to the free market in order to sell their ware, these
>>corporations continue to depend on protectionist policies and government
>>subsidies at home.
>>
>>''How do wealthy countries where aerospace and defence products are
>>produced maintain their ability to subsidise their corporations and at the
>>same time prevent developing governments from practising the same
>>protectionist policies?'' asked Staples.
>>
>>His answer: by negotiating insisting on exempting military spending from
>>the liberalising demands of free trade and investment agreements with
>>other countries.
>>
>>In fact, only rich nations can afford to devote billions of dollars on
>>military spending, and ''they will always be able to give their
>>corporations hidden subsidies through defence contracts,'' Staples said.
>>
>>Fredrik Heffermehl of the International Peace Bureau remarked that at the
>>March celebration of the Nato's 50th anniversary, the only 40
>>non-governmental outsiders invited at the meeting were arms manufacturers.
>>''This tells a lot about what this is all about,'' said Heffermehl.
>>
>>According to an April report by the World Policy Institute in New York, a
>>number of US arms makers put up up to 250,000 dollars each to serve on the
>>host committee for the NATO anniversary.
>>
>>The organisation also says the US government has stockpiled over 1.5
>>billion dollars inn grants and subsidised loans that US firms can use to
>>finance arms sales to new and prospective NATO states.
>>
>>In another World Policy Institute report, Institute president William D.
>>Hartung warns that President Clinton's plan to increase Pentagon spending
>>by 112 billion dollar over the next six years is inconsistent with
>>geopolitics.
>>
>>''There is no threat to US interests that can possibly justify the largest
>>increase in the Pentagon budget since the Reagan era,'' says Hartung.
>>
>>''Current US arms spending of 276 billion dollars per year is already more
>>than twice as much as the combined military budgets of every conceivable
>>US adversary, including Russia, China, Iraq, North Korea, Libya, Syria,
>>and Cuba,'' notes Hartung, adding that the US and its closest allies -
>>Nato members, South Korea, and Japan - now account for nearly two-thirds
>>of world military expenditure. (END/IPS/ns/ds/ak/99)
>>
>>
>>
>>*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
>>is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
>>in receiving the included information for research and educational
>>purposes. ***
>>