Brazen in their desire to become one of the world's top ten arms exporters, the government has once again pledged billions to grow an industry tainted by the spectre of needless death.
Some are quick to condemn the recently announced $3.8b fund to boost the foreign sale of arms as the act of 'warlords', but the arguments against both the proliferation and distribution of arms and defence technology are more nuanced. The issue at hand beckons closer questioning, such as what arms do we export; to whom do we export arms, and why?
Australia is still a very small fish in the world of global arms — ranked 20th in terms of arms exports, with a 0.3 per cent share of the global market. We are not the creators of large weapons of mass destruction, like missiles and bombs. Our manufacturing largely produces equipment and infrastructure ancillary to conflicts — armoured vehicles, parts of aircrafts, ship-fixing technology and high-tech defence systems.
People find it hard to envisage the devastating and warmongering effects of such exports, but a shadow is cast on all of this industrial output when we consider to whom Australia exports its arms.
Australia proudly displays its defence export agreements with democracies like the US, India, the UK and New Zealand. Yet the wars fought by these countries in recent times, like the almost half-decade conflict in Syria, have seen an unbelievable number of civilian casualties. The Syrian Network for Human Rights found that in early 2017, more civilian deaths had been caused at the hands of the US-led coalition than either the Islamic State or Russian forces.
Further, an SMH report last year detailed some of Australia's murky arms dealings with Saudi Arabia — despite the consistent public condemnation of Saudi's actions in bombing the north of Yemen.
Politicians like Christopher Pyne state that Australia has processes in place to make sure we sell arms to the right countries and people, but this process is largely obfuscated. When asked for more information surrounding our exports to Saudi Arabia, former Greens Senator Scott Ludlam was met with the government's familiar sting of 'commercial confidentiality' and 'public interest immunity'. This is echoed by the Department of Defence's line: 'Defence does not release the details of export approvals due to commercial-in-confidence restrictions.'
"The world no longer lives in a Cold War environment, yet our government is still devoid of a conscience regarding the morality of arms proliferation."
The Australian public is faced with wall after wall preventing the disclosure of which countries or private parties we sell arms to, or who gets what. However, even if Saudi Arabia's internationally-criticised actions were deemed legally permissible, and we continued to sell them weapons, what happens to Australia's moral credibility as a promoter of liberal democracy and the rule of law? Why is Australia willing to sacrifice its moral stature and sanction the growth of global arms?
The Turnbull government continues its campaign mantra of jobs and growth as a justification for this large investment in the arms industries. The ALP supported the creation of more jobs, but rightly questioned why these jobs couldn't be created in parallel high tech industries like electric car manufacturing or renewable energy — industries that have a greater net benefit to all Australians.
The Stockholm International of Peace Research Institute's 2016 annual report rationalised Australia's position in the global arms trade as a reflection of our desire to counter the perceived threat from China. Yet, in the past months the Coalition is yet to reach any consensus about whether they do consider China a threat, with mixed messages coming from the Deputy PM Barnaby Joyce and the Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.
Beyond the politics, this is above all an ethical issue. Pope John XXIII in his 1963 encyclical Pacem In Terris, declared 'hence justice, right reason and the recognition of man's dignity cry insistently for a cessation to the arms race'. Fifty-five years later, the world no longer lives in a Cold War environment, yet our government is still devoid of a conscience regarding the morality of arms proliferation. Surely the desire to increase our defence exports by over 700 per cent to enter the world's top ten arms distributers echoes a severe lack of understanding surrounding the devastation and morally indefensible nature of selling arms.
Countries of the world need to protect themselves, but when the manufacturing and distribution of arms becomes an industry on which you build a campaign promise to deliver better economic growth, something is surely wrong. When Australia's arms sales reach the shores of countries and parties with histories of human rights abuses and blunders, the growth or even existence of a defence exports industry must be heavily questioned.
Noah Vaz is studying a bachelor of arts (media and communications) and bachelor of laws at the University of Sydney, majoring in Chinese studies. He is editor of the University of Sydney Union's PULP Media, and has a keen interest in international relations and domestic politics. Follow him on Twitter @noahvaz