(12 of 12)
A Carter discovered, a unilateral policy of weapons-sale restraint can be bootless. But a policy that exalts a lack of restraint can likewise reap a whirlwind of unwanted, unpredictable challenges. If Reagan abandons any serious attempt to seek controls for the flow of weaponry, he will have given in to a danger that threatens American interests, with only the poor excuse that others did it too.
In order to arrive at a solution, the world will first have to realize there is a problem. Only then will international opinion have the power to cause governments to have second thoughts before they buy weapons that are not needed, or sell what should be kept in store.
Such deeper calculations are sorely needed as the world arms bazaar grows ever larger. Without them, the prospects for global control look grim, as grim as the prospects for peace in a world flooded with weapons so ubiquitous that even a child can tote one, so powerful that even a handful of terrorists can hold a society hostage.
—By Walter Isaacson.
Reported by Johanna McGeary/ Washington and Bruce van Voorst/Brussels, with other bureaus
* Global figures are elusive because of governmental secrecy and the difficulty in determining dollar equivalents for various armaments and their related support systems. Most authoritative sources, such as U.S. Government reports and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) yearbook, include only officially sanctioned and publicly reported sales of major conventional weapons.
* Government-to-government sales, which account for 90% of U.S. arms transfers, must be initiated by the purchasing nation and approved by the State Department. Any sale involving $25 million or more must be reported to Congress for review and can be rejected by a majority of both houses. Private sales of less than that amount can be made by companies that get an export license from the State Department's Office of Munitions Control.