Weapons Proliferation in the 1990s
Arm in Arm: The Political Economy of the Global Arms Trade. William W. Keller. New York: Basic Books, 1995, 288 Pp. $25.00.
Keller, formerly a senior analyst and project director at the now-defunct congressional Office of Technology Assessment, chronicles and deplores the conventional arms trade in the late and post--Cold War periods. He focuses primarily on airplanes, tanks, and ships, paying rather less attention to the sale of components, upgrades, and military services, which are of no less importance. The book concludes with a call for the restraint of the international arms trade but an acknowledgment of the powerful political and economic incentives for its continuation.
Roberts' book of essays, taken from The Washington Quarterly, is superior, even though it is an edited volume rather than the product of a single hand. Essays such as those on the deception practices of the Iraqis by David Kay or nonapocalyptic proliferation by Henry Sokolski are informative and novel and carry along some of the weaker contributions. The volume is worth skimming throughout and a close reading in places.
Related
The Clinton administration supports crippling economic sanctions that punish the Iraqi people but seems ready to live with the demise of international inspections to monitor Saddam Hussein's nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs. Washington has it exactly backward. It should offer Baghdad a blunt trade: lightened sanctions in return for renewed, intrusive arms inspections. The sweeping sanctions regime does nothing to advance U.S. interests, undermine Saddam, or contain Iraq. Leaving Saddam's arsenal unwatched is folly. Better to have arms inspections without sanctions than sanctions without arms inspections.
What should the United States do about Iraq? Hawks are wrong to think the problem is desperately urgent or connected to terrorism, but right to see the prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam Hussein as so worrisome that it requires drastic action. Doves are right about Iraq's not being a good candidate for an Afghan-style war, but wrong to think that inspections and deterrence alone can contain Saddam. The United States has no choice left but to invade Iraq itself and eliminate the current regime.
After the Cold War, the demands on American leadership are no less stern than they were in Dean Acheson's day. Present again at the creation, U.S. diplomacy must pass a series of tests -- of vision, pragmatism, spine, and principle -- to build a foundation for a new world. This will mean encouraging democracy, stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction, working to shore up the international financial system, engaging Beijing, and standing up to Baghdad and Belgrade. But America needs resources to lead, and Congress has foreign policy living hand-to-mouth. America cannot afford to abdicate its world role.
