Canadianarmssales.html

Canadian munitions sales to Latin America taking off

BY WILSON RUIZ
Special to The Globe and Mail
LIMA

In the past decade, purchases of military products have increased dramatically in Latin America, and Canada, a relative latecomer to the trade, is starting to take a bigger piece of the action.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in the past five years Canadian military exports to Latin American countries have averaged $137-million a year.

The success of 150 Canadian companies operating in the Latin American arms market is widely attributed to the ways in which the federal Government assists the defence industry.

Ottawa channels its aid to the industry through the International Defence Programs Branch, an agency of the Department of External Affairs whose function is to promote the sale of Canadian-made defence products abroad.

To keep track of the defence equipment and weapons needs of the Latin American armed forces, the branch has representatives stationed at strategic centres throughout the region.

The branch also assists Canadian suppliers when bidding on defence contracts and in generally coping with the administrative and diplomatic red tape that is an inevitable part of the international arms market.

The Canadian defence products offered in Latin America run from men's underwear to the CL-T4 Tutor jet armed trainer. An important sales aid is the 500-page Canadian Defence Products Catalogue, published by the Department of External Affairs and available free of charge at Canadian embassies throughout Latin America.

The catalogue includes an index of companies in the defence business, with brief descriptions of the specialties of each, with additional information such as that "combat underwear is dyed olive green to reduce camouflage problems when the items are drying in the field."

Underwear, however, is not the mainstay of Canada's defence industry exports to Latin America--aircraft are.

The most popular Canadian aircraft in Latin America is the DHC-4 Caribou. More than 90 Caribou are now flying with a dozen air force services--among them the Honduran, Peruvian and Ecuadorean air forces.

Montreal-based Canadair Lt. and Toronto-based de Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd. are the most prominent companies in the field. These two companies account for almost 70 per cent of Canada's aircraft exports to Latin America.

A full range of crowd control and anti-riot equipment is also available from Canadian suppliers. Included in this is a special Canadian-made vomiting gas that paralyzes the victim for up to five minutes.

Highly sophisticated electronic and communications equipment, including gun direction computers, guided missile components and launchers, several types of detection aircraft equipment, as well as photo aerial reconnaissance systems are also sold to the Latin American armed forces.

"It helps when a product is first sold to our own armed forces," said the president of a Canadian arms exporting firm who has just completed a Latin American tour, citing the example of the Grizzly amphibious vehicle.

Manufactured by Oshawa-based General Motors of Canada Ltd., the Grizzly is advertised in the Canadian Defence Products Catalogue as "an all-around vehicle equipped with two machine-guns, an assault cannon and a mortar."

After the Canadian Forces ordered 350 Grizzlys, inquiries from Latin America began to arrive at the company's headquarters.

The president of the arms exporting company also said that sales of military products to Latin America and other Third World countries help the Canadian armed forces to acquire a sufficient quantity of sophisticated and costly military equipment.

He explained that the production in Canada of many modern weapons systems is often possible only if the production run is increased, so that each unit absorbs a smaller amount of the basic investment in tooling, labor and plant costs.

"In order to arm ourselves, we must help arm the world. That is the reality of the Canadian defence industry," he said.*
(text of article from September 9, 1988 Globe and Mail)


*-During the 1980's and into the 1990's i belonged to a number of n.g.o.'s and met with representatives of others to discuss my "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children and how often our "concerns" and goals might be similar or the same.
Given that we set the goal of the work in 1978 to be "for children and people responsible for protecting their well-being: our common future," and that i've never hidden the fact that i agree with Ralph Nader's philosophy that "the highest office in a democracy is the citizen"--though i might qualify that by adding it to be the "well-informed citizen"--i never saw any conflict of interest in belonging to the groups or attending their events.
Obviously, if you move around this website you can tell i didn't always see eye to eye on policy with Ronald Reagan. But when i did, as the website also illustrates, i was never reticent about expressing the agreement with him or his policies.
Until it became obvious to me that the American people and in fact "all of us" were being misled about "Irangate"... If you bear in mind that i sent my August, 1986 statement to "The Arab League" via a registered letter to then-United Nations Assistant Secretary-General Gorin Ohlin, with whom i'd met only months before in Vancouver, and that there were still innocent hostages being held in Lebanon as late as the early 1990's, and that things were happening to them as is illustrated by what you find if you TAKE A BRIEF SIDESTEP HERE, i suppose it all comes down to what value you place on the lives of the innocent. I opened this website as soon as i could after the U.N. sent me the 1995 United Nations Iraqi Weapons Inspector report that, i explained to then-Chief Weapons Inspector Rolf Ekeus's office by telephone on November 3, 1995, was being touted by Newsworld (one of Canada's two 24-hour a day television news services) in an October 12, 1995 news report as stating that Iraq had "enough biological weapons to destroy the world."
Indeed, i agree with the wisdom of nineteenth century British jurist Jeremy Bentham as is stated in the 1988 draft of the "AUTHOR'S INTRODUCTION" to my (first) book about my "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis." To see what "view" he had on what can happen to the helpless and innocent, TAKE A BRIEF SIDESTEP HERE. And as i would think all but the most dimwitted imbeciles could figure out, if the 1978 "U.S. Presidential Papers Act" prohibits destruction of said papers commencing with those dated January, 1981 and limits the rights of the outgoing president(s) to restrict public inspection and evaluation--if indeed we're lucky we're all still here because there are several times since i did this "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children in 1978 when decisions had to be made that might have led to the destruction of "all of us", what exact justification/excuse would be sustainable to prohibit public awareness of the contents of this "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children that, as the Vatican and Israeli and Egyptian political leaderships knew in 1978 RESUME HERE. There is no instance in these matters that i can recall--and my memory is very good--where i did not let at least the executive committees of these groups know that i did the "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" for the world's children. Had they expressed opposition to my belonging to their groups or participating in their events i would have respected that. Notwithstanding that TAKE YOUR NEXT FOOTSTEP HERE.



This page hosted by