Selling arms to China different from selling arms to Indonesia?

[j07950]

I remember not too long ago, a lot of things said about Europe wanting to sell weapons to China, and how that was wrong... I can understand that view, and with a war looming between China and Taiwan, I'm not inclined at all to having China possese the best technologie available.
But then I've done a bit of reading lately and I wanted to get your view on how that was different from say: the US and UK selling weapons (the sale of 625 billion pounds in arms (to Indonesia), a record never reached by the Tories (Conservatives) and surpassed only by the US) to Indonesia and training their soldiers to fight in East Timor and In Aceh...?

I thought in a way that it was related and wanted to know if you guys knew much about it...

 

[onedomino]

Where's the link that verifies the sale of US military equipment to Indonesia? US military assistance to Indonesia was terminated in 1992. A $600,000 grant was authorized at the end of February 2005 for the US training of Indonesian military officers. Cite the link supporting the claim of US weapons sales to Indonesia since 1992. What, precisely, do you claim was sold to the Indonesians? I am not in favor of US arms sales to Indonesia. Regardless, selling weapons to a democratically elected Indonesian government cannot be compared to selling weapons to the totalitarian Chinese. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/GC03Ae01.html. Unsupported, you cite the sale of "625 billion pounds in arms" by the US and UK. Cite your source. 625 billion pounds equals more than $1.2 trillion dollars. Ridiculous.

 

[j07950]

Where's the link that verifies the sale of US military equipment to Indonesia? US military assistance to Indonesia was terminated in 1992. A $600,000 grant was authorized at the end of February 2005 for the US training of Indonesian military officers. Cite the link supporting the claim of US weapons sales to Indonesia since 1992. What, precisely, do you claim was sold to the Indonesians? I am not in favor of US arms sales to Indonesia. Regardless, selling weapons to a democratically elected Indonesian government cannot be compared to selling weapons to the totalitarian Chinese. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/GC03Ae01.html. Unsupported, you cite the sale of "625 billion pounds in arms" by the US and UK. Cite your source. 625 billion pounds equals more than $1.2 trillion dollars. Ridiculous.

You're going about this the wrong way again...Where do you come up with the 1992 thing? I just said that the US and UK have sold arms in the past to Indonesia, who has used them to violate Human rights etc... Anyway...
The 625 billion pounds (amazing isn't it? hard to believe...) was approved in 1998 by the Labour government...I think maybee they meant millions and not billions...

Where did this 1992 figure come from? Because I've read various documents thats say the US has sold weapons post-1992 to indonesia. Government records show that since 1992, the Clinton administration has sold or licensed more than $1 billion worth of arms to Indonesia (http://www.motherjones.com/news/special_reports/arms/indonesia.html). Also that, Indonesian military forces linked to the carnage in East Timor were trained in the United States under a covert programme sponsored by the Clinton Administration which continued until 1998 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/indonesia/Story/0,2763,200716,00.html).
Since Sept. 11, 2001, the United States has resumed, and gradually increased, IMET funding to Indonesia. In 2002, Indonesia received $405,000 in IMET, and for FY 05, the budget request has risen to $600,000 (http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=2505).


Again, don't take this the wrong way...you're going about this as if I was accussing the US and all...
My point is this: isn't giving weapons (even in the past, killings startes in 1975...) to a "Democratic?" government that violates human rights and kills innocent people as bad as arming China? It's not excuse for arming china though...I sure in hell don't like the idea...

 

[onedomino]

The year 1992 comes from the fact that US military assistance to Indonesia was terminated in that year. You cite Mother Jones and that extreme leftist rag the Guardian as credible sources? The title of the 1999 Guardian swill is: “US Trained Butchers of Timor. Exclusive: Washington trained death squads in secret while Britain has spent £1m helping Indonesian army.” This type of hysterical anti-American leftist excrement is typical of Al Guardian. Maybe the propagandists at Al Guardian would prefer that Indonesian military officers receive their training in Pakistan, Iran, China, or Russia. A US trained former Indonesian military officer is the current democratically elected President of Indonesia: Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0930667.html . Where do you think SBY should have been trained?

From the Center for Defense Information link that you posted:

Indonesia's Submission to the
United Nations Register of Conventional Arms
(Imports, U.S. Only)

1992 $0
1993 $0
1994 $0
1995 $0
1996 $0
1997 $0
1998 $0
1999 $0
2000 $0
2001 n/a
2002 n/a
2003 $0


U.S. Military Assistance Prior to Sept. 11, 2001

Indonesia’s Armed Forces are estimated at 302,000 active personnel. Indonesia’s military expenditure was approximately $1 billion in Fiscal Year (FY) 1998, or 1.3 percent of its GDP that year. (These are the most recent figures available in the CIA’s 2004 World Fact Book.) Indonesia has participated in the UN Register of Conventional Arms, but has not received any U.S. weapons since it began submissions to the register in 1993. Since 1990, U.S. security assistance to Indonesia has been erratic. From 1990 through 1992, Indonesia received over $5.8 million in International Military Education and Training (IMET) funds, and also received $25 million in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) in 1991. IMET and FMF funding to Indonesia was cut off by Congress in 1992 because of the 1991 Santa Cruz massacre in which the Indonesian military fired on peaceful demonstrators in East Timor, killing over 270 of them and wounding many more. This restriction was partially lifted in 1995, and IMET funding was restored at lower levels. Indonesia received over $1.6 million in IMET from 1996 through 1999. In 1999, the Indonesian government agreed to a UN referendum process in which the East Timorese could vote for autonomy or independence. In response to the overwhelming pro-independence vote, Indonesian military forces and militias perpetrated violence and numerous human rights violations. The Indonesian military culpability in these events was deemed reason to reinstate the cuts to IMET funding to Indonesia.


U.S. Military Assistance Since Sept. 11, 2001

Immediately after Sept. 11, 2001, Indonesia expressed its support for the global war on terror. Since 2002, Indonesia has suffered a number of terrorist attacks. Jemaah Islamiya (JI) – a radical Islamic terrorist group with links to al-Qaida – is known to be operating in Indonesia, and responsible for several attacks including the Oct. 12, 2002 bombing in Bali, in which over 200 people were killed. Although Indonesia’s coordination and success in its antiterrorist efforts have been limited – for example, it has not succeeded at freezing any terrorist assets – the State Department’s annual Patterns of Global Terrorism report notes significant increases in Indonesian antiterrorist efforts in 2002 and 2003. Highlights of Indonesia’s antiterrorism efforts include: the arrest of 109 JI suspects; the amendment of its anti-money laundering law; the adoption of an antiterrorism law; broadening the powers of government officials working to combat terrorism; and the creation, with U.S. assistance, of a financial intelligence unit.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, the United States has resumed, and gradually increased, IMET funding to Indonesia. In 2002, Indonesia received $405,000 in IMET, and for FY 05, the budget request has risen to $600,000. If FY 05 is indeed funded at the requested level, Indonesia will have received over $1.7 million in IMET funding since FY 02. Foreign Military Financing to Indonesia has been restricted by Congress since 2000, and remains off-limits to Indonesia. FMF to Indonesia was restricted because of human rights violations in East Timor; those violations have not been redressed, and 75 percent of the accused abusers are still free. Yet, there has been recent speculation that the State Department will renew requests for FMF for Indonesia in FY 06. The renewal of IMET assistance and discussions of resuming FMF represent a significant possible U.S. policy change.

 

[j07950]

Yeah what you bring foward is right...but thats not what I was talking about. You brought up the 1992 thing. Human rights violation have been taking place for ages in Indonesia...so whether the US stoped in 1992 or not is irrelevant. In the end they still get weapons from the UK...same thing...
About the Guardian...although it may be sort of lefty it's a really well regarded newspaper here in the UK last time I checked, and a really good source of information, as good as any.

 

[Said1]

Yeah what you bring foward is right...but thats not what I was talking about. You brought up the 1992 thing. Human rights violation have been taking place for ages in Indonesia...so whether the US stoped in 1992 or not is irrelevant. In the end they still get weapons from the UK...same thing....

Why is it irrelevant? You brought up both.

 

[Annie]

Totally off topic, but just want to say I'm enjoying this conversation very much, thanks all. Onedomino, I think I may christen you the new fact checker. I wish someone would second the recommendation. I think I've put in my time!

 

[Said1]

Totally off topic, but just want to say I'm enjoying this conversation very much, thanks all. Onedomino, I think I may christen you the new fact checker. I wish someone would second the recommendation. I think I've put in my time!

Wasn't it you who said "consider the source"? or was it "poster"?

 

[Annie]

Wasn't it you who said "consider the source"? or was it "poster"?

Onedomino is more than a worthy poster, and his sources are great. I think it's time to pass that baton. (hot potatoe).

 

[Said1]

Onedomino is more than a worthy poster, and his sources are great. I think it's time to pass that baton. (hot potatoe).

Hey! I didn't mean him, I was refering to R2D2. :tng:

 

[Annie]

Hey! I didn't mean him, I was refering to R2D2. :tng:

LOL! Why didn't you say so? :teeth:

 

[Said1]

LOL! Why didn't you say so? :teeth:

Sorry, I thought it obvious. :crutch:

 

[Annie]

Sorry, I thought it obvious. :crutch:

Rough Day! :crutch:

 

[Said1]

Rough Day! :crutch:

Well, I wouldn't suggest using one of those "kits" to add sublte highlights to your hair. :scratch: