WITH CLEAN ARMS! – limiting arms trade with countries avoiding climate responsibility

We (the undersigned) urge the parliament to start legislative preparations for the passing of a law that allows the Finnish Defence Forces to import arms only from countries that are part of the Paris Agreement on climate change mitigation and that are committed to the aims of the Paris Agreement.

The manufacturing country of arms and weaponry is that state whose authorities give the permission of selling or exporting the arms or weaponry in question.

Arguments:

The Finnish Defence Forces obtains arms and weaponry in order to be prepared for a military conflict and to prevent such conflicts in advance. The climate change with all phenomena resulting from it is one of the most significant factors causing conflicts today.
Weapons industry is heavy, high-energy industry with a big carbon footprint. If the weaponry is not manufactured in a climate-responsible way, the arms manufacturing in itself is the cause for those conflicts that are controlled by arms.

It is not ethically acceptable that a country or a company should increase global instability by avoiding their responsibility for climate change, and in this way increase the demand for their arms production.

It is not fair trade if the arms dealers in countries that avoid their climate responsibility can gain financial benefit and competitive edge on the expense of the European arms dealers that do bear their climate responsibility.

It is not beneficial to national safety if the arms industry of those countries that carry their responsibility for the climate is withered away by unfair competition with the countries that do not.

One of the biggest arms dealers in the world, the US, is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate change mitigation. The arms industry is one of the most powerful leaders of the US economy. The arms industry operators could pressure the US government back into the Paris Agreement if they so willed.

The upcoming fighter purchase of the Finnish Defence Forces is a remarkable arms transfer even on a global scale. By setting the prerequisite that the manufacturing country must be committed to the Paris Agreement, Finland could be setting an example of climate responsibility, promoting similar principles and legislation in other countries in the EU and UN as well as NATO.

Because of the complicated b-to-b chains and the globally integrated manufacturing processes it is perhaps not possible to find completely “climate clean” arms dealers. It must thus suffice to rule out manufacturers whose base is in countries not committed to the Paris Agreement. Multinational dealers may be considered as based in the country whose authorities give them the permission for arms export.

If national security and maintaining our defence ability so requires, we can leave out of this new law the spare and complementary parts of the Finnish Defence Forces’ existing weaponry.

This proposal for a law offers a realistic and effective way to involve both states and international businesses in the common cause of preventing climate catastrophe.