Advanced

EU:s medlemsländers vapenexport till Kina – Rättsliga förutsättningar och politiska intressen i ett förändringsperspektiv

Rabus, Andrea LU (2010) JURM01 20101
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
1989 antog Europeiska Unionen ett vapenembargo mot Kina efter landets hårdhänta hantering av protesterna på Tiananmen-torget som ägde rum i juni samma år. Tjugo år senare är vapenembargot fortfarande i kraft, trots att flera medlemsländer återkommande har föreslagit att det ska hävas.

Det finns många komplicerade förhållanden som gör att eventuella försök att antingen skärpa eller häva EU:s vapenembargo mot Kina förhindras. Vapenembargot är i sin form helt olikt EU:s andra embargon på grund av att det är det enda som införts före Maastrichtfördraget 1992. De senare har tillkommit inom ramen för EU:s gemensamma utrikes- och säkerhetspolitik och är rättsligt bindande. EU:s vapenembargo mot Kina antogs som en deklaration av ministerrådet... (More)
1989 antog Europeiska Unionen ett vapenembargo mot Kina efter landets hårdhänta hantering av protesterna på Tiananmen-torget som ägde rum i juni samma år. Tjugo år senare är vapenembargot fortfarande i kraft, trots att flera medlemsländer återkommande har föreslagit att det ska hävas.

Det finns många komplicerade förhållanden som gör att eventuella försök att antingen skärpa eller häva EU:s vapenembargo mot Kina förhindras. Vapenembargot är i sin form helt olikt EU:s andra embargon på grund av att det är det enda som införts före Maastrichtfördraget 1992. De senare har tillkommit inom ramen för EU:s gemensamma utrikes- och säkerhetspolitik och är rättsligt bindande. EU:s vapenembargo mot Kina antogs som en deklaration av ministerrådet och är därmed endast en rekommendation och inte rättsligt bindande.

Vapenembargot kringgås genom att stödsystem och produkter med dubbla användningsområden tillåts att säljas till Kina. Detta på grund av att den deklaration som reglerar vapenembargot endast innefattar en kort formulering av förbud mot vapenhandel. Referenser till vilken typ av krigsmateriel som omfattas i exportförbudet saknas. Detta har bidragit till att EU-länderna tolkar embargot olika, vilket innebär att EU:s vapenembargo mot Kina istället består av ett antal nationella embargon. Detta har gjort att vapenexporten till Kina inte avstannat sedan 1989.

Uppsatsen syftar till att behandla frågan: Har EU:s vapenembargo mot Kina spelat ut sin roll? Uppsatsen belyser bakgrunden till EU:s vapenembargo mot Kina, hur frågan om embargots utformning och ett eventuellt hävande hanterats i Bryssel samt hur ekonomiska intressen och politiska tolkningar har påverkat vapenexporten till Kina från EU:s medlemsländer. Uppsatsen innehåller även en redogörelse om deklarationens rättsliga status och förtydligar medlemsländernas egna tolkningar. Under senare tid har EU antagit rättsligt bindande regler för export av krigsmaterial, vilket är EU:s gemensamma ståndpunkt för vapenexport. Uppsatsen innehåller en redogörelse angående frågan om de bestämmelserna kan ersätta vapenembargot.

EU:s gemensamma ståndpunkt om vapenexport är det enda rättsligt bindande EU-dokument som begränsar vapenexport av krigsmateriel till Kina. Det är främst två kriterier i EU:s gemensamma ståndpunkt som kan utgöra ett hinder för export av krigsmateriel till Kina från EU. Kriterierna omfattar mänskliga rättigheter samt stabilitet och säkerhet i regionen.

Den konklusion som nås är att de begränsningar som finns i den gemensamma ståndpunkten för vapenexport från 2008 kan appliceras på Kina. Till följd därav kan den gemensamma ståndpunkten förhindra export, även om embargot hävs, vilket ger en tydlig indikation på att vapenembargot spelat ut sin roll. I alla fall som instrument att förhindra vapenexport. (Less)
Abstract
The European Union issued an arms embargo on China as a reaction to the repression of the protests at the Tiananmen Square in June 1989. Today, twenty years later, the arms embargo on China is still not lifted, even though several member states have suggested it.

Several complicated issues are connected with the lifting of the arms embargo. The shape is significantly different from the other EU embargoes since it was adopted before the Maastricht Treaty, signed 1992. The latter ones are included in the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy and are therefore legally binding. The arms embargo on China is solely a recommendation and not a binding legal act.

Military equipment is still exported to China from the EU. This is because the... (More)
The European Union issued an arms embargo on China as a reaction to the repression of the protests at the Tiananmen Square in June 1989. Today, twenty years later, the arms embargo on China is still not lifted, even though several member states have suggested it.

Several complicated issues are connected with the lifting of the arms embargo. The shape is significantly different from the other EU embargoes since it was adopted before the Maastricht Treaty, signed 1992. The latter ones are included in the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy and are therefore legally binding. The arms embargo on China is solely a recommendation and not a binding legal act.

Military equipment is still exported to China from the EU. This is because the declaration, which governs the arms embargo, only includes a brief formulation of the ban on arms trade. References to the type of military equipment covered in the arms embargo are missing. The member states therefore interpret the declaration different, which means that the EU arms embargo on China consists of various national arms embargo. Such interpretations have contributed to an increase of exported military equipment to China since 1989.

This essay seeks to address the question: Has the EU's arms embargo against China had its day? The paper highlights the background to the EU arms embargo on China, the question of the embargo design and how a possible lifting has been handled in Brussels, and in what respect political interpretations and economic interests have influenced exports of military equipment from EU member states. In addition, the essay also contains an account of the legal status and clarifies the member states' own national interpretations. In recent years the EU has adopted legally binding rules for the export of military equipment, which is the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports.The essay contains a statement as to whether the rules can replace the arms embargo.

The EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports is the only legally binding EU document that restrict arms exports of military equipment to China. There are two main criteria of the EU's common position that could hinder exports of military equipment to China from Europe. The criteria include human rights and stability and security in the region.

The conclusion reached is that the restrictions contained in The EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports from 2008 can be applied on China. As a result, the Code of Conduct can hinder exports, even if the embargo is lifted, which gives a clear indication that the embargo had its day. In any case, as an instrument to prevent arms exports. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Rabus, Andrea LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
EU member states' arms exports to China – Legal requirements and policy interests in a change in perspective
course
JURM01 20101
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
folkrätt, EU-rätt
language
Swedish
id
1690583
date added to LUP
2010-10-15 11:03:30
date last changed
2010-10-15 11:03:30
@misc{1690583,
  abstract     = {The European Union issued an arms embargo on China as a reaction to the repression of the protests at the Tiananmen Square in June 1989. Today, twenty years later, the arms embargo on China is still not lifted, even though several member states have suggested it. 

Several complicated issues are connected with the lifting of the arms embargo. The shape is significantly different from the other EU embargoes since it was adopted before the Maastricht Treaty, signed 1992. The latter ones are included in the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy and are therefore legally binding. The arms embargo on China is solely a recommendation and not a binding legal act. 

Military equipment is still exported to China from the EU. This is because the declaration, which governs the arms embargo, only includes a brief formulation of the ban on arms trade. References to the type of military equipment covered in the arms embargo are missing. The member states therefore interpret the declaration different, which means that the EU arms embargo on China consists of various national arms embargo. Such interpretations have contributed to an increase of exported military equipment to China since 1989. 

This essay seeks to address the question: Has the EU's arms embargo against China had its day? The paper highlights the background to the EU arms embargo on China, the question of the embargo design and how a possible lifting has been handled in Brussels, and in what respect political interpretations and economic interests have influenced exports of military equipment from EU member states. In addition, the essay also contains an account of the legal status and clarifies the member states' own national interpretations. In recent years the EU has adopted legally binding rules for the export of military equipment, which is the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports.The essay contains a statement as to whether the rules can replace the arms embargo.

The EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports is the only legally binding EU document that restrict arms exports of military equipment to China. There are two main criteria of the EU's common position that could hinder exports of military equipment to China from Europe. The criteria include human rights and stability and security in the region.

The conclusion reached is that the restrictions contained in The EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports from 2008 can be applied on China. As a result, the Code of Conduct can hinder exports, even if the embargo is lifted, which gives a clear indication that the embargo had its day. In any case, as an instrument to prevent arms exports.},
  author       = {Rabus, Andrea},
  keyword      = {folkrätt,EU-rätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {EU:s medlemsländers vapenexport till Kina – Rättsliga förutsättningar och politiska intressen i ett förändringsperspektiv},
  year         = {2010},
}