Skip to content or view screen version

British Aerospace AGM and arms sales

Mike Wells | 09.05.2007 16:23 | Anti-militarism | Terror War | London

BEA weapons hurt people. Outside BEA AGM a man who claimed to have been bombed by BAE Hawk Jets showed me his injuries.

Blair and the Attorney General
Blair and the Attorney General

Benny show me his wounds
Benny show me his wounds


Today, 9th May 2007, London hosted the Annual General Meeting of British Aerospace (BAE). Protesting outside the BAE AGM I meet Benny. He is from Papua New Guinea. He told me that in 1977 when he was a child his village was bombed by Indonesian BEA Hawk Jets. During a series of air raids on his and many other villages a large numbers of people where killed, injured and displaced. He was seriously wounded in the leg. He and others were forced to abandon their villages, he spent 5 years in the jungle where Traditional medicine helped him survive his injuries. He eventually found his way to the UK where his leg is now undergoing reconstructive surgery.

It is perhaps ironic that the UK taxpayers have guaranteed the sale of BAE equipment through the Export Credits Guarantee system. Under this system, if the country buying the weapons does not pay up, the UK tax payer pays off the debt, thus giving a risk free deal to companies like BAE. There is some justice in the fact that the UK tax payer is, after all these years, paying to repair the damage done to his leg.

The reason the British Hawks bombed villages in West Papua is unclear to me. Despite claims of the use of Hawk jets in 1977 against innocent villagers in West Papua, and later in East Timor, New Labour went of to approve the sale of more Hawks to Indonesia in 1997, 1999 and 2000.

The world of selling arms is a murky domain where ethical policies appear to be buried under huge piles of money. The investigation into the BAE arms deal to Saudi Arabia was dropped, by Blair and the Attorney General, in the interests of “national security”, there were no doubt huge sighs of relief from the boardroom of BAE. Cynical people might wonder if BAE was able to influence the outcome of this investigation?

Mike Wells
- e-mail: mikejwells@yahoo.com

Additions

Comments

Hide the following 5 comments

Bombed by aircraft they didn't have!

10.05.2007 07:35

Problem with this story is that it is a very well attested historical fact, backed up by copious sources, including in web-available published research by CAAT and TAPOL, that the very first sale of BAE Hawk jets (8 of them) to Indonesia was in 1978, which would then have meant that the aircraft were delivered sometime thereafter. So how could they have been used to bomb a village in Irian Jaya in 1977?

Just a journalistic slip up in reporting the wrong date given by Benny, or another example of disinformation, perhaps?

Naturally it can be taken for granted that the typical aircraft recognition skills of people in Irian Jaya (and elsewhere) are sufficiently informed to be able to differentiate between the BAE Hawk, the Northrop Grumman F-5E/F and the McDonell Douglas A-4/TA-4 Skyhawk, all of which have been operated by the Indonesian Air Force, when these are flying overhead at high speed and can only be glimpsed for a few seconds! Or is it just much simpler and more media-worthy always to refer to the Hawk in such cases?

Brinley Salzmann
mail e-mail: b.salzmann@the-dma.org.uk
- Homepage: http://www.the-dma.org.uk


Hawks on loan before 1978?

10.05.2007 10:23

Thank you for your comment regarding the use of Hawk Jets in 1977.

I am aware that the first delivery of Hawks arrived in Indonesia in 1977. In my article I do not say that the Hawks were used, merely that Benny reported their use. However I have no reason to doubt his testimony. I believe it is quite likely that the Indonesians may have had Hawks on loan for test purposes. It would be only sensible, bearing in mind the size of the investment, for the Indonesians to try the Hawk aircraft operationally before purchase. The loan of aircraft would also be a sweetener for the deal.

Mike Wells
mail e-mail: mikejwells@yahoo.com


BAE Systems also lobbies for Trident replacement

10.05.2007 13:23


Who benefits from Britain building a new generation of nuclear submarines for its illegal nuclear weapons system? BAE Systems and Rolls Royce, who would be the most likely beneficiaries of the multi-billion-pound contracts for the new subs and propulsion system respectively. Hence BAE Systems (and perhaps Rolls Royce too?) have been heavily lobbying the British government for an unnecessary and premature replacement of the Trident system when we don't even need new subs or nuclear weapons period.

What we ought to be doing is promoting multilateral disarmament initiatives, as required by the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Has the government been doing this at the NPT Review PrepConf in Vienna this month? Erm, no actually.

BAE Systems is corrupt as hell and works hand in glove with the British government and other oppressive and corrupt governments around the world. I’d struggle to think of a worse example of big business controlling government policy.

Say no to nukes and nuclear power


CAAT's BAE campaign

10.05.2007 13:57


Yesterday's protest outside the AGM of BAE Systems in Westminster was organised by the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT).

Check out their website for more information and reports on this and their other campaigns.

 http://www.caat.org.uk/

BAE Above the Law