[Mb-civic] Forget WMD -- It's Conventional Arms That Are Killing GIs and Iraqis LATimes

[Michael Butler]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stohl19jul19,1,3643886.
story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

COMMENTARY

Forget WMD -- It's Conventional Arms That Are Killing GIs and Iraqis
 By Rachel Stohl
 Rachel Stohl is senior analyst at the Center for Defense Information in
Washington, D.C.

 July 19, 2004



 When the United States turned over sovereignty to the new government of
Iraq last month, it did so without confronting one of the most pressing
problems facing the country: the millions of small arms and light weapons
plaguing Iraq's security and threatening its stability. Excluding small arms
from the long-term security plan is a deadly mistake.

 Since the declared end of major combat operations in May 2003, an average
of one American has died every day in Iraq, and more than one-third of these
soldiers have been killed by small arms ‹ revolvers, rifles, pistols and the
like. Thousands more have been injured and some have been unable to complete
their duties because of the level of violence and insecurity fueled by small
arms. Moreover, uncounted Iraqi civilians have been killed, wounded,
threatened or terrorized by small arms.

 While U.S. policymakers were consumed with finding weapons of mass
destruction, mission planners largely ignored the threat of conventional
weapons. Reports estimate that Iraq has perhaps the fourth-largest supply of
conventional arms in the world. An embedded reporter in Iraq said military
sources told him this included "3 million tons of bombs and bullets,
millions of AK-47s and other rifles, rocket launchers and mortar tubes, and
thousands of more sophisticated arms like ground-to-air missiles." The 2004
edition of the Small Arms Survey estimates that at least 7 million to 8
million small arms have fallen into the hands of Iraqi civilians since the
fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.

 One of the additional challenges in dealing with small arms and light
weapons in Iraq is the 2003 U.S. policy that allows Iraqi males to keep one
weapon. Most have chosen to keep an AK-47 for their personal security, but
these arms often find their way out of homes and make their way to the black
market or are used for crime and violence.

 To address these myriad problems, the U.S. in mid-May undertook an
eight-day gun buyback program in Iraq offering amnesty and cash in return
for weapons ‹ for instance, $125 for an AK-47. It distributed about $350,000
a day to individuals turning in weapons, from ammunition to surface-to-air
missiles. 

 The effectiveness of this type of program, however, is questionable. First,
Iraqis are not being required to turn in all their weapons. Second, many are
buying weapons on the black market and turning them in to the Americans for
a profit. There are even credible reports of Iraqis turning in older weapons
in order to buy newer models on the street. And in some places, such as
Karbala, U.S. troops ran out of money. The buyback was a symbolic victory,
for some weapons were removed from circulation. But it was an ad hoc and
short-term program; it did little to increase overall safety and security,
nor did it stymie the black market. Moreover, providing the equivalent of a
month's salary or in some cases a year's wages to someone who has illegally
possessed weaponry no doubt fueled resentment and jealousy and created
targets for criminals.

 Iraqis would benefit more from community-based weapon-collection programs
and symbolic destruction celebrations. Rather than an individual receiving
cash for each weapon turned in, neighborhoods could receive services that
benefit the entire group ‹ job training or the building of a post office or
soccer field. With good incentives, such programs have worked in other
nations. In all cases, the United States must destroy weapons quickly,
preferably in a public demonstration, and securely stockpile those that have
yet to be destroyed.

 On June 22, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, told the House Armed Services Committee that the United States should
"expect more violence, not less, in the immediate weeks ahead." Deputy
Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told the same committee that the U.S. had
"underestimated" the threat from insurgents in Iraq, and that the U.S.
military could keep "a significant number" of U.S. troops in Iraq for "years
to come." Developing a coherent, long-term strategy for small arms is not
only prudent, it is lifesaving.




If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at
latimes.com/archives.

Article licensing and reprint options




 Copyright 2004 Los Angeles Times