A top-secret Armscor document contains startling information about arms sales. Gaye Davis reports
ARMSCOR sanctioned the sale of military materiel to repressive dictatorships like Haiti, to countries on the brink of civil war such as Somalia and Sudan, and sold weaponry to Warsaw Pact countries — though not the Soviet Union — well before the collapse of communism.
It also sanctioned arms sales to the Burmese government, notorious for human rights abuses, as well as to a Burmese resistance movement, which may have fuelled civil conflict in the South East Asian country.
These are among the startling facts to emerge from a top- secret Armscor document in the possession of the Weekly Mail & Guardian. It is a 1989 version of the “Log 17” memorandum now at the centre of a battle over the public’s right to know, between defence force lawyers and the Cameron Commission of Inquiry into South Africa’s foreign arms sales.
International-relations experts and foreign-policy analysts this week described the document as revealing a “confused mindset” with regard to foreign policy. They said while it reflected the former government’s obsession with a “total onslaught” it was also riddled with anomalies, reflecting a mixture of cynicism and opportunism.
Said one international-affairs specialist: “The document is an embarrassment to Armscor and, indeed, to Foreign Affairs. It seems to reveal a lack of geographical understanding and of politics. It is also an embarrassment for wider reasons, in the sense of who we were willing to sell to.”
Armscor is charged with vetting marketing and export applications for arms from the South African arms industry — and export applications for the sale of defence force stock – – in terms of the Armaments Development and Production Act. Beyond safeguarding national security, its statutory responsibilities include ensuring South Africa does not compromise international non-proliferation treaties and contributing to world peace.
The Log 17 in the WM&G’s possession is dated January 1989 and thus pre-dates the unbanning of the ANC and the fall of the Berlin Wall. The Log 17 is regularly updated by the Defence Force Foreign Policy Committee, chaired by defence force chief of staff (intelligence) and comprising representatives from the different arms of the South African National Defence Force, Armscor, National Intelligence and the Foreign Affairs Department. Countries’ classifications are then finalised by the State Security Council for approval by the cabinet.
Countries are listed under three categories: those to whom military materiel of any kind can be sold (Group 1); those who may only be sold materiel of “a non-sensitive nature” (Group 2); and those prohibited from any sales at all (Group 3). (See accompanying article for the full list.)
The version in the WM&G’s possession makes fascinating reading. Commented a foreign-policy analyst: “It makes Alice in Wonderland seem quite straightforward. There are a huge number of anomalies, which perhaps reflect covert links with countries that we didn’t know about. But the categories are sometimes haphazard — one gets the impression not a great deal of thought went into it, although hindsight is always 20:20.
“A number of countries seem to have been dealt with on the basis of sales being prohibited if they were Marxist regimes or had supported the ANC. But if they were thought far enough away for weapons not to trickle back, or if the association was thought not to hold any implications for South Africa, the attitude seems to have been ‘what the hell, let’s sell to them anyway’. The list says a lot about the lack of worldliness of the compilers.”
Most of the 159 countries fall under Group 1, meaning no restriction on sales, bar hardware still being developed or that could not be marketed due to “the sensitivity of foreign content”.
Included in this class were Eastern Bloc countries such as Albania (one of the last regimes to fall) and Yugoslavia, where one of the decade’s worst civil conflicts was to erupt. While sales to several Eastern Bloc countries were sanctioned, deals with Russia were strictly prohibited.
Taiwan is an obvious Group 1 inclusion, while sales to the People’s Republic of China were, surprisingly, also sanctioned. Somalia, later plunged into civil war and famine, was also Group 1.
The inclusion of some countries indicates there were strong covert links with South Africa, an international relations expert noted. These include Pakistan, Mexico, Jamaica, Malaysia — all officially extremely hostile to the apartheid regime. Scandinavian countries which supported the ANC, like Norway, Denmark and Sweden, are also Group 1.
Group 2 countries which could receive non-sensitive, or defensive, materiel — including non-automatic and semi- automatic weapons and ammunition of a calibre less than 20mm — included India, Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique (riven by civil war) and Uganda — all countries allied to the ANC. Yet Zambia and Zimbabwe were listed under Group 3 and prohibited from receiving any weapons — “obviously a straight anti-ANC thing”, noted an analyst.
Intriguingly, Scotland is listed as a separate entry under Group 1, where Britain is also listed.
“It appears different standards were applied to determine countries’ status,” the international-affairs expert said. “Decisions relating to the Far East and Latin-American countries seem to follow the lead set by American/British relations.
“But the list shows we had some surprising friends among former communist countries. There were also few scruples in selling to dictatorships, sometimes highly repressive, like Haiti, or to countries either experiencing civil strife or on the brink of it.”
Said the foreign-policy expert: “It seems business with almost everybody was okay. It says a lot about the cynicism of the international arms trade.”
The SANDF, which is taking on review to the supreme court the Cameron Commission’s decision last week to make public information relating to South Africa’s weapons sales abroad, had until 4pm on Friday to bring an urgent interdict aimed at restraining the commission from releasing related documents, including this version of Log 17.
In a milestone decision last Friday, Acting Judge Edwin Cameron refused an application by the SANDF, Armscor and the Foreign Affairs Department not to make the documents public, ruling that the public’s right to know superceded any embarrassment publication might cause.
Armscor, the SANDF and Foreign Affairs argued that disclosure would jeopardise national security and harm South Africa’s trade and international relations.
On Tuesday, Cameron dismissed an application by SANDF counsel Henry Shakenovsky for the inquiry to suspend hearings until mid-January, to allow time to launch review proceedings. He also asked the commission for an undertaking not to release any documents pending the review, saying his client would be forced to obtain an urgent supreme court interdict restraining the commission from doing so if it gave no undertaking.
Cameron said if the SANDF had not launched review proceedings by 4pm on Friday the commission would release the documents and resume hearings on Monday — unless restrained by a court order. Although “unhappy about it”, Armscor will abide by the commission’s decision, spokesman Bertus Cillier told the WM&G.
Defence Minister Joe Modise has meanwhile plunged himself into a political dilemma by distancing himself from the SANDF’s gag bid. He said he believed the matter should be dealt with “outside my involvement” — a move likely to be interpreted as a spineless abdication of his authority in favour of SANDF generals.
Modise said: “The fact that this commission was appointed at my request must not be seen to inhibit parties for whom I am politically responsible, in this case the SANDF and Armscor, from exercising any option which the legal process allows them to take.”
* The cabinet will early in the new year discuss a system for classifying countries for arms sales abroad, as well as a policy regarding disclosure, cabinet secretary Jakes Gerwel said after a meeting of the cabinet committee on security and intelligence affairs on Wednesday.
While it is not usual for any statement to follow a cabinet committee meeting, Gerwel said there had been keen public and media interest in two agenda items: disclosure on weapons sales abroad and South Africa taking part in an Angolan peacekeeping force.