|
Friends United Meeting |
 |
December 1997
Peace - One Step at a Time
The Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers
By Bridget Moix
If I've learned anything in my time with Friends, it is the value of patience and the power of persistence. For five years now, the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) has been working to pass a Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers, a bill that would help curb the sale of U.S. arms abroad. When I began a legislative internship with FCNL in September 1996, the Code had already been voted on in both the House and Senate (with substantial, though not winning support), and was moving through Congress again. But I had no idea what an inspiring history it held. Now, reflecting back on our past work and future prospects, I see a broader picture of the Code-one that illustrates how Friends create practical tools today to start building new pathways toward a more peaceable community for the future.
Staking Our Ground
In the early 1990s, the Gulf War widely exposed the dangers of unrestrained weapons sales and opened the way for a new debate on the arms trade. Across the globe, conventional arms have become the new weapons of mass destruction and the standard tools of oppression and human rights abuse. On today's "battlefields," more than 90% of all casualties are civilians. Meanwhile, the transfer of conventional weapons has become a pillar of U.S. foreign policy, and this year the U.S. reclaimed its title as the world's number one arms supplier.
As Lora Lumpe of the Federation of American Scientists explains in reflecting on the birth of the Code, "It was time to stake out the moral high ground." We needed a proactive strategy to address the dangers of the arms trade in the post-Cold War world. So, when Friends gathered at the 1992 FCNL Annual Meeting, a consensus arose. FCNL would add to its already challenging list of legislative priorities the task of "bringing an end to military aid, arms exports, and trade in weapons of all kinds" (Statement of FCNL Legislative Priorities for the 103rd Congress, Nov. 15, 1992). The goal was clear and absolute. But, with the U.S. arms industry controlling about 50% of the global market and contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars to political campaigns each year, we guessed our friends in Congress might not see the simplicity of our proposal. Fortunately, patience and persistence are what Quaker lobbying is all about.
Laying the Foundation
Working together with other concerned groups, we developed a "Code of Conduct on Arms Transfers." Under the Code of Conduct, weapons would not be sold or given to countries which:
- have undemocratic forms of government;
- do not respect the human rights of their citizens;
- engage in aggressive acts against other countries; or,
- do not make their trade in arms transparent through the UN Arms Registry.
To Friends, the Code often seems too small a step. Our goal, after all, is to end all weapons transfers. But, in fact, the Code could have a serious impact on the U.S. arms industry. Over 90% of U.S. arms transfers go to countries that do not currently meet the standards set out in the Code. The Code of Conduct could begin applying the brakes to the system and open the way for future work toward our larger vision.
To take that first step, though, we needed public and congressional support for our idea. The Arms Transfer Working Group (ATWG), a Washington, DC-based coalition that meets regularly in FCNL's E. Raymond Wilson Conference Room, agreed to take on the task of transforming this vision into a law. We began seeking allies among other organizations and the results have been inspiring. Churches and faith groups, women's and veterans' organizations, groups working on development and relief efforts-over 300 national and regional organizations now endorse the Code of Conduct!
To lead the effort in Congress, Senator Mark Hatfield (OR) and Representative Cynthia McKinney (GA) stepped forward in 1995 to champion the Code, giving it a bi-partisan cast from the start. Through its work with ATWG, FCNL participated in meetings with the staff of Hatfield and McKinney to help craft a bill from the Code concept. Then the slow process of moving legislation through Congress began.
Ours was a multi-year strategy: focus on the House in 1995 and the Senate in 1996; get enough attention that Congress would take serious notice of this idea; then push for passage in 1997-98. We would persist patiently.
Before I came to FCNL, I assumed that lobbying was mainly about persuasion-convincing a legislator who was weighing the options that ours was the best choice, the right thing to do. But my work with FCNL has shown me a different kind of lobbying. Rather than pure persuasion, our role as lobbyists is more about educating and presenting the options in a clear light. Since 1995, FCNL and ATWG have been working to educate the public and Congress around the Code of Conduct. The seemingly never-ending process of legislative work-circulating congressional "Dear Colleague" letters, communicating with offices, coordinating press conferences, holding congressional briefings, delivering informational packets to congressional offices, and asking our local activists again and again to write, fax, call, and visit their members-was recycled over and over. First in the House, then in the Senate, then back to the House.
The work can be dizzying, but I have yet to find it daunting. At every spin, our purpose is revisited, our vision renewed. Our efforts on the Hill would be fruitless without the voices from "beyond the beltway." By writing, calling, and speaking with members of Congress, Friends and other concerned activists raised the issue and gathered congressional support for the Code at every critical juncture of the campaign. When we thought we were doomed in 1995 on the first House committee vote, we came within a single vote of winning! When we were sure the Senate would dismiss us with a quiet chuckle, we won over a third of the full floor vote! When I became discouraged at the enormous task ahead of us and the scarcity of our resources, a call from a Friend across the country-"What's the latest on the Code?"- never failed to clear my vision and renew my spirit.
Seeking a Common Path
With 1997, came a new session of Congress, new challenges, and new opportunities. Our House champion, Rep. McKinney, was joined by an unlikely co-sponsor in the House, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (CA). Together, they crossed partisan and ideological grounds to forge a partnership that speaks to all ends of the political spectrum. Sen. Hatfield, our Senate champion, retired, opening the way for new Senate leadership that has now been filled by Sen. John Kerry (MA).
Meanwhile, our coalition came to a vital crossroads. In a spring committee vote, the Code lost by only two votes. Reps. McKinney and Rohrabacher were ready to try for a floor vote, but they wanted ATWG's blessing. We knew another failed floor vote could endanger the Code's future, but we were not ready to give up in the House. We faced a tough decision.
Compromise is always a part of life on Capitol Hill, and Friends are experts at redefining success. At the same time, the Code has seemed such a small and reasonable step from the beginning. We had already added a presidential emergency waiver to soften the bill. What else could we compromise without sacrificing our vision?
ATWG was divided. Some groups wanted to risk a recorded vote on the original Code and hold representatives responsible after an inevitable loss. Others wanted to seek a compromise on the legislation and gain greater support before going to the floor. Consensus seemed distant.
In the strategy meeting to decide ATWG's next step, tension made the air thick and heavy, almost difficult to breathe. I noticed that Joe Volk, FCNL's executive secretary, was seated dead center between the divided groups. I didn't envy his position. But soon I realized his choice of seat was intentional, for FCNL plays more than one role as peacemaker in Washington. Joe became the natural pivoting point of the debate that would determine the future of the Code. He spoke calmly and respectfully to each side, maintaining a quiet sense of consensus-building in a situation that might easily have erupted into harsh division. His natural diplomacy staggered me.
Of course, it is not only a matter of individual skill. Joe's role as peacemaker stems from a tradition of peace building inherent in a history of political and community mediation embodied in FCNL's work for over 50 years. That tradition is nourished by Friends' sense of vision and path-building throughout the centuries. I realized at that moment that FCNL's work is not only about advocating for Quaker concerns to Congress. It is also about serving as the Quaker voice on the Hill and bringing a Friendly presence to the political arena-encouraging peaceful dispute resolution and consensual decision-making within the coalitions and the communities where we work.
In the end, we would take "half a loaf," as Joe advised. ATWG would support a revised version of the Code that maintained the principles of the bill but changed its process. We would secure this step and prepare for the next mile.
Way Opens
As we worked on the revised Code in the House of Representatives, we also began stepping up efforts to make the Code an international issue. At a meeting hosted by FCNL a few years ago, Dr. Oscar Arias, former president of Costa Rica and Nobel Peace laureate, had begun forming a strategy for creating an international Code of Conduct, and 1997 would prove to be an important milestone in realizing that idea.
On May 29, eight Nobel Peace Prize recipients came together in New York City to sign the International Code of Conduct. Sitting in the Hall of St. John the Divine with ATWG colleagues and hundreds of activists of all ages, we listened to the Dalai Lama, Elie Weisel, Don Gann of the American Friends Service Committee, and others speak of the effects of the global proliferation of weapons of war. The power of belief energized the room and crystallized this moment of solidarity in my mind and heart. "I know that all this, all we are trying to do here sounds utopian," Elie Weisel's words resonated through me, "I know that; I am not naive. But so what!" A cheer filled the room. Light danced in the aisles.
The Path Ahead
On June 10, the House of Representatives passed the McKinney-Rohrabacher Code of Conduct on a voice vote as an amendment to the State Department Authorization bill. It was the first time in over 20 years that the House has passed such legislation on arms transfers. On July 24, Sen. Kerry (MA) introduced the Code in the Senate and began gathering co-sponsors to demonstrate support for the House Code and prepare for future efforts. As I write, the McKinney-Rohrabacher Code faces the negotiating table in a House/Senate conference committee. The outcome is still uncertain, but after five years of struggle, the Code has a chance to become law!
Stunned by the Code's House victory, arms manufacturers have stated their intentions to "euthanize the Code of Conduct." We shall see. But I'll put my faith in the patience and persistence of Friends. I see the path more clearly every day.
Bridget Moix began at FCNL in September 1996 as a legislative intern
and is now a legislative program assistant. She attends Friends Meeting
of Washington. For updates on the Code of Conduct, please contact FCNL
at 245 Second St., NE, Washington, DC 20002; phone (202) 547-6000; fax
(202) 547-6019; e-mail
Copyright (c) Friends United Meeting 1997
Back to December 1997 Contents