The United Nations has been working on a new small arms treaty this month and now a draft text is emerging. And though the president shows a misunderstanding of the second amendment and doesn’t appear much of a gun rights defender to anyone, in the negotiations for the treaty, it was the United States throwing blankets on the wet dreams of international gun control advocates.

Anti-gun advocates at the conference, for example, wanted to target bullets. From IPS:

“At the moment, the treaty is covering some weapons but not bullets, which are literally the fuel of conflict,” [Oxfam’s head of global arms control Anna] McDonald said… “It doesn’t make sense,” McDonald told IPS. “The U.S. is the government that’s holding out the strongest against the inclusion of ammunition, but it actually regulates its own ammunition exports.”

U.S. negotiators say such regulations would be too burdensome. So not pro-gun, but anti-regulation is close to a first too. Anti-gun advocates are hopeful though that things will get better for them if Obama gets re-elected:

“Sadly for the millions of lives at risk elsewhere in the world, U.S. politics in an election year prevents the Obama administration from taking a bold stand to champion its own model laws,” Kathi Austin, executive director of the Conflict Awareness Project and former U.N. arms investigator, told IPS.

“President Obama is a crucial decision maker and the U.S. could stand up firm in terms of ensuring that these loopholes are closed in the final day of negotiations,” Hughes added.

The treaty’s unlikely to be finalized before the election. President Bush refused to include the United States in negotiations on the treaty, effectively scuttling them, but presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney hasn’t stated a position on the issue. Were the president to sign the treaty, it would still need to pass with sixty seven votes in the Senate. Fifty one Senators have announced they’ll oppose the treaty if it infringes on the right to bear arms, though given their Constitutional oaths maybe it should have been more? If the Senate does ratify the treaty and it includes an end-run on the Second Amendment, there’s always, maybe, the Supreme Court, which in the 1957 case Reid v. Covert ruled that "no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or on any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution,” which is at least as good as a parchment guarantee.

The United Nations does not (pdf) consider self-defense a human right, but does consider severe restrictions on gun ownership a human right, because the United Nations does not understand what a right is. The U.S. has always been the largest financer of the U.N. (a World War 2 brain child of FDR and Winston Churchill) and U.S. spending on the U.N. hit an all time high in 2012."

http://reason.com/blog/2012/07/27/un-gun...estrictive

An array of groups supporting an international arms trade treaty under negotiation at the United Nations are urging President Obama to strengthen its terms.

The world body's 193 members have until Friday to agree to a treaty regulating the export of weapons. A first draft of the treaty floated Tuesday has many advocacy groups worried, however.

Even the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which rarely raises its concerns publicly, has been unusually vocal.

“All the core provisions of this draft treaty still have major loopholes which will simply ratify the status quo, instead of setting a high international standard that will change state practices and save lives on the ground,” AFP quoted the head of the ICRC's arms unit, Peter Herby, as saying.

Key issues include the fact that the draft treaty doesn't require the regulation of ammunition, and does not appear to apply to weapons given as aid or donations.

Oxfam America, meanwhile, blasted the U.S. representative to the Arms Trade Treaty Conference for publicly stating that the United States wants exemptions for national-security interests.

“Ambassador Donald Mahley said to the United Nations on July 12, that 'it would be inconsistent with the principle of sovereign national implementation to require that [human rights and humanitarian law] criteria take precedence over criteria such as regional stability and national security,'" senior policy adviser Scott Stedjan said in a statement. “Since when was adherence to the laws of war and protecting human rights an adversary to national and global security?”

Some groups are more sanguine about the treaty. Amnesty International said closing a few “loopholes” could “deliver an important win for humanity by curbing the export of weapons and ammunition to countries where they will likely be used to slaughter civilians.”

Specifically, Amnesty International wants the Obama administration to ensure that the final treaty covers “all types of transfers” of weapons, not just the commercial “export” of weapons. In addition, the group said in a statement, the treaty should be flexible to cover new arms technologies that could be deployed in the future.

"The treaty is not perfect, but it deserves the administration’s support," said Amnesty International USA Executive Director Suzanne Nossel. "President Obama should step forward to protect human rights and push this treaty across the finish line.”

Even if the U.N. approves a treaty by the end of the week and the Obama administration signs it, the treaty faces a tough slog in the U.S. Senate, where gun-rights champions are already uniting against it. To date, 58 senators have signed letters raising concerns with any treaty that covers civilian weapons; the draft treaty says it would apply to “small arms and light weapons.”

Proponents of the treaty say Second Amendment concerns are unfounded, and argue excluding civilian weapons would gut the effort to keep deadly arms out of the hands of terrorists and rogue regimes.

Advocates say the treaty would bring much of the world in line with U.S. standards without affecting the rules that govern domestic sales. And they say gun enthusiasts are wrong to worry about gun rights, since the Constitution trumps international law.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/...ade-treaty

Countries and advocacy groups that want a pending arms trade treaty to cover ammunition have failed to make their case, the Obama administration told the United Nations on Tuesday.

The world body has been engaged in a month-long effort to craft a treaty creating international standards for importing and exporting conventional weapons. The idea is running into domestic opposition in the United States — 130 lawmakers expressed their concerns in a letter to President Obama earlier this month — and on Tuesday a State Department official told the U.N. Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that proposals to cover ammunition would cost a fortune and yet do “little or nothing to achieve the goals” of the treaty.

“Ammunition is a fundamentally different commodity than everything else we have discussed including within the scope of an ATT,” said Thomas Countryman, the assistant secretary of the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation at the State Department.

“It is fungible, consumable, reloadable, and cannot be marked in any practical way that would permit it to be tracked or traced. Any practical proposal for ammunition would need to consider the significant burdens associated with licensing, authorizations, and recordkeeping for ammunition that is produced and transferred in the billions of rounds per year," he added. "Because each State imports small arms and light weapons ammunition, these burdens would need to be assumed by each State at significant administrative and financial costs.”

Countryman added that the United States has asked over the past year for proposals showing how ammunition could be regulated in a way that would be both “practical and effective,” but has received “no substantive responses.”

His statement to the U.N. conferees comes on the same day as the national online movement GlobalSolutions.org delivered a petition, signed by more than 5,200 Americans, to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking the administration to "strongly support" a treaty that "blocks arms transfers to nations that violate human rights, includes rules for all conventional weapons like parts, tanks, and bullets, and is enforceable, transparent and effective."

Countryman said the United States “will continue to listen to any proposals for including ammunition.” A list of the administration's “key red lines” for the treaty published on the State Department website, however, includes that there “will be no requirement for reporting on or marking and tracing of ammunition or explosives.”

Here's his full statement:

Throughout the lead-up to this Conference, the United States has made clear that ammunition should not be included within the scope of the ATT. This position should not come as a surprise. It is what we have articulated in discussions about the UN International Tracing Instrument and the UN Program of Action. Let me be clear again about the reasons for our position.

The United States recognizes that the illicit trafficking of ammunition poses challenges to the international community and we have worked with our law enforcement partners and other nations in practical ways to meet these challenges. The Department of State Conventional Weapons Destruction Program has funded the destruction of over 90,000 tons of excess, loosely-secured or at risk ammunition since 2003. Our Department of Defense has partnered with many nations to upgrade the physical security and stockpile management practices at munitions depots. Nevertheless, we have argued, and continue to believe, that including ammunition within the scope of an ATT will do little or nothing to achieve the goals of the Arms Trade Treaty for several reasons.

Ammunition is a fundamentally different commodity than everything else we have discussed including within the scope of an ATT. It is fungible, consumable, reloadable, and cannot be marked in any practical way that would permit it to be tracked or traced. Any practical proposal for ammunition would need to consider the significant burdens associated with licensing, authorizations, and recordkeeping for ammunition that is produced and transferred in the billions of rounds per year. Because each State imports small arms and light weapons ammunition, these burdens would need to be assumed by each State at significant administrative and financial costs.

Our own experience in regulating domestic transfers has shown that there is little utility for law enforcement in imposing the same controls on ammunition transfers as we do on arms. Accordingly, the United States largely eliminated most controls on domestic transfers of ammunition.

For at least the last year, and in response to repeated pleas that the United States modify its position on ammunition, we have solicited proposals about how ammunition could be included within the scope of an ATT in a way that would be both practical and effective. We have received no substantive responses. It can be argued that national controls over ammunition transfers might help prevent ammunition being used for illicit purposes, but requiring such domestic controls is beyond the scope of a treaty regulating international transfers. Therefore, including ammunition within the scope of an ATT may sound desirable, but it will do little or nothing to further the goals and objectives of the treaty.

As the United States has said before, we will continue to listen to any proposals for including ammunition. Our criteria in evaluating such proposals are simple – they must be realistic and limited in the burdens they impose, and they must be effective in achieving the goals and objectives of the ATT. In the absence of such a proposal and a compelling case for its benefits, the United States remains steadfast in its opposition to including ammunition in the ATT.

—This post was updated at 12:25 p.m. with news of the petition to Secretary of State Clinton.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/...ammunition

The International Red Cross has joined opponents of a draft arms trade treaty out Tuesday that critics said contains only “ambiguities and loopholes.”

Following the release of the first draft, the 193 UN members must now race to agree on a text to regulate the $70 billion a year arms trade by Friday, the deadline set by the UN General Assembly.

Civil society groups condemned the draft text for not including ammunition and allowing too much scope for arms transfers that would escape the treaty.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) rarely speaks out on controversial diplomatic topics as it seeks to preserve its neutrality.

But Peter Herby, head of the ICRC’s arms unit, said: “All the core provisions of this draft treaty still have major loopholes which will simply ratify the status quo, instead of setting a high international standard that will change state practices and save lives on the ground.”

The Red Cross joined Amnesty International, Oxfam and other groups which have launched major campaigns to persuade the major powers to agree a tough, binding treaty.

It is a text of “ambiguities and loopholes,” commented Roy Isbister of the Saferworld lobby group. Anna Macdonald, arms control expert for Oxfam, likened the text to a “leaky bucket.”

Isbister said the proposed treaty would have little impact on most of the conflicts claiming civilian lives in the world now.

The main arms producers — the United States, Russia, China, Britain, Germany and France — have haggled through three weeks of talks on the scope of the treaty and the criteria for how to judge an arms transfer.

The United States has opposed the inclusion of ammunition, China does not want small arms included, and both Russia and China have sought restrictions on references to humanitarian law.

Syria, North Korea, Iran, Cuba and Algeria and other countries have sought from the start to thwart the treaty, diplomats and activists say.

The draft treaty does mention ammunition, but Isbister said it was incomprehensible.

“This means if you want to control ammunition, you can control ammunition, if you don’t want to control ammunition there is nothing here to force you. And that is a glaring problem.”

Brian Wood, an expert for Amnesty International, highlighted the vague definition for arms transfers in the draft. It would not cover the substantial amount of arms given as aid or as donations, he said.

“These loopholes could easily be exploited to allow arms to be supplied to those that intend to use them to commit serious human rights violations, as the world is seeing in Syria,” Wood said.

Britain has been one of the most outspoken of the major arms producers calling for a binding, all-encompassing treaty.

A British diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: “The chair has produced a text that we should all be able to work with to get the high ambition result that we need. The next 24 hours will be crucial in narrowing the gaps.”

The treaty must be agreed by consensus so any of the 193 countries involved could object on Friday. And even if a treaty is concluded, the conference has not yet decided how many countries must ratify it to bring it into force.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/25/un...oles-ngos/

After 9/11, the United States government created the Department of Homeland Security to prevent future acts of terrorism and deal with other domestic issues. Now in order to keep doing such, the agency is asking for 450 million hollow point bullets.

The DHS has signed off on an “indefinite delivery” from defense contractors ATK that will include, for some reason, nearly 500 million high-power ammunition for .40 caliber firearms. The department has yet to discuss why they are ordering such a massive bevy of bullets for an agency that has limited need domestically for doing harm, but they say they expect to continue receiving shipments from the manufacturer for the next five years, during which they plan to blow through enough ammunition to execute more people than there are in the entire United States.

“We are proud to extend our track record as the prime supplier of .40 caliber duty ammunition for DHS,” reads an official statement from Ron Johnson, ATK’s president of Security and Sporting, who adds that his group will also be giving up weaponry to the DHS subdivision of ICE, or Immigrations and Custom Enforcement.

While ammunition itself seems not too unreasonable of a request by a major federal entity that emphasizes domestic durability and safeguarding the country from coast to coast, the choice — and quantity — of its hollow point order raises a lot of questions about future plans for the DHS. ATK says they won their contract with the US government by being able to provide them with 450 million HST bullets, which it describes as “the next generation in high performance duty ammunition.”

What does that mean, exactly? On their website, the contractor claims that the ammunition is specifically designed so that it can pass through a variety of obstructions and offers “optimum penetration for terminal performance.” Or, in other words, this is the kind of bullet designed to stop any object dead in its tracks and, if emptied into the hands of the DHS a few hundred million times, just might do as much.

Since its inception, the Department of Homeland Security has not only absorbed ICE and other government entities, but has arguably extended its powers much more broadly than many had imagined. Under the recently authorized Trespass Bill, H.R. 347, protesters that allegedly disrupt occurrences acknowledged by the DHS of being a National Special Security Event will be charged with a federal crime. As the DHS gains more and more ground in fighting terrorism domestically, the US at the same time has turned the tables to make its definition of terrorist way less narrow. With any American blogger or free thinking on the fringe of what the government can go after under H.R. 347, or the National Defense Authorization Act that allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens without charge, the DHS could just be blasting through what’s left of its budget to make sure that its roster of agents across the country can get in their target practice over the next few years.

Of course, the government might just want to ensure that each one of those agents is more than able to assassinate Americans not just around the globe, but on their own soil. After all, for all of those angsty alleged Americans engaged in terrorism abroad, the US has the largest military in the history of the world to deal with them. In that case, they could argue that it only makes sense to equip their armed forces at home as well.

http://rt.com/usa/news/dhs-million-point...nment-179/

There are two stories that have come to light recently, the first is the awarding of a contract to a munitions manufacturer for 450,000,000 hollow point rounds for the .40 caliber.

The second story which I wrote is how the Department of Homeland Security had already ordered 200,000,000 rounds of .40 caliber, but also ordered 15,000 gun cleaning kits for the .40 caliber weapons, and has put a request out for a virtual shooting gallery for the .40 caliber handguns.

650,000,000 round of ammunition is quite a bit of lead and brass. It will sure to drive the price of copper and brass way up. But Homeland Security is not alone in their requests.

The other departments -- the ones that handle mundane things like meat quality -- believe they need to be armed to the teeth as well. It’s enough to make a non-paranoid person, well, paranoid.

The US Department of Agriculture put in a bid for a wide variety of ammunition. I guess raiding farms and raw milk dairies can be very dangerous work. The required rounds are listed below, and include shotgun slugs.

Frangible rounds – for those who don’t know, are rounds that are designed to break apart when they hit walls or other hard surfaces to prevent ricochets during close-quarters combat.


Added: Sep 28, 2011 5:15 pm
(1) 40 caliber, 180 grain, 120,000 rounds or equivalent,
(2) 9 mm, 124 grain, 50,000 rounds or equivalent,
(3) .38 caliber, 135 grain, 10,000 rounds or equivalent,
(4) .380 caliber, 90 grain, 6,000 rounds or equivalent,
(5) .223 caliber, 64 grain, 87,500 rounds or equivalent,
(6) 12 gauge 00 buck, 15,000 rounds or equivalent,
(7) 40 caliber frangible, 10,000 rounds or equivalent,
(8) 9 caliber frangible, 10,000 rounds or equivalent,
(9) .223 caliber frangible, 10,000 rounds or equivalent,
(10) 12 gauge 1 oz slug, 7,500 rounds or equivalent

The cartridges shall be delivered to Albuquerque, NM.

And the Department of the Interior needs ammunition as well, but much less, and put the order out on September 2011:

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services require the following items, Exact Match Only, to the following:

1. Remington Frangible .40 Caliber Pistol Ammunition – 2,500 rounds

2. Remington .40 Caliber Pistol Ammunition (180 grain) Full Metal Jacket – 6,000 rounds

3. Remington .223 Caliber Rifle Ammunition (62 grain) Full Metal Jacket – 3,000 rounds

4. Remington FX Marking Cartridges (9 mm) – 2,000 rounds

These requirements seem normal considering the possibility of running into grizzly bears and wolverines. These, to me, are acceptable quantities to order.

And of course the FBI needs about 100,000,000 rounds of .40 caliber ammunition for law enforcement needs. It posted the request November 15, 2011 and the order will be awarded this week. Oddly, it states a fixed-price, indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity type contract; however the pricing requirements go up to 100,000,000 rounds.

So with that large order, we now can move the total “excess” number of .40 caliber rounds that is needed by this administration to 750,000,000 rounds.

Because we live in a free society they feel they must be armed against Amish folk who want to sell people raw milk, like most humans on this planet drink. Maybe the USDA needs the ammunition to fight the evil cadre of “Lemonade Stands” that will soon be terrorizing people walking down sidewalks in Suburbia America.

How can a government justify 2.2 rounds per American citizen? Granted, ammunition does have a great shelf life, but this is utterly ridiculous!

The best way to avoid a civil war is not to start one. If “they” are planning to start one, then it would make sense to arm yourself and take away the guns of the citizenry. If this is just for “work”, ie, to stop bad guys, then the numbers just don’t make sense.

As Sherlock Holmes would say, “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”. We are running out of the impossibles and the improbables.

The leftovers are unconscionable and frightening. The game is afoot my friends. Evil in the guise of a benevolent government is still evil.

Will the characters be unmasked in time for our free country to remain free, or will we be another stiff on the slab of history.

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/04/it-l...ition.html

A Texas senator is blocking confirmation of the nominee for the Army’s top weapons buyer until the Defense Department pledges to take action against a Russian company supplying arms to Syria’s Assad regime.

Republican Senator John Cornyn has invoked a senatorial prerogative to place a “hold” on Heidi Shyu, President Barack Obama’s nominee to be the Army’s assistant secretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, according to an aide to the senator who spoke on condition of anonymity because discussions about the dispute are being held in private.

Cornyn is leading a Senate effort pressuring the Department of Defense to stop doing business with Rosoboronexport, Russia’s state-run arms trader. The Army has a $375 million, no-bid contract with the company to buy 21 Russian-made Mi-17 helicopters for Afghanistan’s air force that it says only Rosoboronexport can provide.

“The DoD and the Army have refused to look for alternatives, even as Rosoboronexport continues to arm the Assad regime,” Cornyn said in an e-mailed statement. “The DoD and the Army must end their practice of handing no-bid contracts to this problematic Russian broker and instead conduct full and open competition for all future Mi-17 procurement.”

The Senate by tradition permits any senator to place a hold on a nomination for a period of time to gain leverage in a dispute with the executive branch.

Electrical Engineer

Shyu, who is serving as the Army’s acting acquisition chief, was a vice president of Raytheon Co., a defense contractor, before joining administration in November 2010, according to a White House announcement when Obama nominated her in February.

Shyu also has served as vice chairman of the Air Force’s scientific advisory board. She received bachelor’s and master’s degrees in mathematics from the University of New Brunswick and the University of Toronto, both in Canada, and a master’s degree in electrical engineering from the University of California, Los Angeles. She began her career in 1978 as an engineer for Hughes Aircraft Co.

The Army has taken delivery of nine helicopters, with six more awaiting shipment and another six to be delivered by May 31. The U.S. has an option to buy an additional 12 Russian helicopters for the Afghans, who have been flying them for decades, Pentagon officials told Cornyn. The Senate Armed Services Committee estimates the purchases could reach $1 billion.

Against Civilians

Pentagon Undersecretary for Policy James Miller acknowledged in a March 30 letter to a lawmaker “that Rosoboronexport continues to supply weapons and ammunition to the Assad regime” and “there is evidence that some of these arms are being used by Syrian forces against Syria’s civilian population.”

A representative of the Moscow-based company said June 8 that it’s also bidding to sell ammunition to the U.S. armed forces.

Five suppliers competing for a U.S. military contract have invited Rosoboronexport to act as a subcontractor, it said in an e-mailed statement. The ammunition would be used in international coalition operations, the company said.

Separately, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today said the Assad regime is set to receive a new order of attack helicopters from Russia.

“We are concerned by the latest information we have that there are attack helicopters on the way from Russia to Syria, which will escalate the conflict quite dramatically,” Clinton said without elaboration at a conference today in Washington.

‘Deeply Troubled’

Cornyn, a member of the Senate Armed Service panel, wrote in a letter yesterday to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta that he remained “deeply troubled that the DoD would knowingly do business with a firm that has enabled mass atrocities in Syria.”

“I support the president’s call for the end of the Assad regime, as well as the goal of stopping the flow of arms to Syria,” Cornyn wrote. “But the DoD’s ongoing business relationship with Rosoboronexport undermines both.”

Panetta spokesman George Little in an e-mail today said the secretary has received Cornyn’s letter and “will reply promptly.”

Aircraft ‘Crucial’

“These aircraft remain crucial to the development of Afghanistan’s Air Force capability and therefore important to our mission of ensuring that Afghan forces can ultimately defend their own sovereignty,” Little said.

The Rosoboronexport contract “is the only legal method to purchase the military version of the Mi-17 and to provide an appropriate measure of flight safety and airworthiness,” he said. “This procurement complements the existing aircraft inventory, completing the number of helicopters necessary to establish the Afghan Air Force’s rotary-wing capability for ensuring its future security.”

Pentagon spokesman Navy Captain John Kirby said at a press conference today that the Syrians are “killing their own people.”

“So I got the connection to Russia,” he said. “We’re going to take the senator’s concerns very seriously, but let’s not let the Assad regime off the hook here. It’s less important what they’re buying than it is what they’re doing with what they’ve got.”

House-Passed Ban

The Senate committee in the report on its fiscal 2013 defense authorization bill directed the Government Accounting Office to review the contract.

The House, in the version of the measure it passed, adopted an amendment by Representatives Rosa DeLauro, a Connecticut Democrat, and Kay Granger, a Texas Republican, that would prohibit future contracts to Rosoboronexport.

Their amendment would prohibit the Defense Department from awarding a contract to supply helicopters to the Afghan security forces to any entity “controlled, directed or influenced” by a state that has supplied weapons to Syria or a state sponsor of terrorism.

The Senate defense measure is S. 3254. The House-passed version is H.R. 4310.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ALLTOP-.../id/442084

On July 18, Congress passed a bill to effectively cancel a $171 million contract with Russian helicopter company, Rosobornexport, saying the U.S. does not want to do business with Russia who supplies arms to the Syrian government.

According to a statement by U.S. lawmakers, Rosoboronexport has supplied nearly $1 billion in arms to Syria over the last year, including high-explosives, mortars, sniper rifles, ammunition and attack helicopters which could have been used by Assad’s forces to kill civilians. The bill came hours after Russia and China, for the third time, vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution imposing sanctions on the Syrian regime.

Crystal Park spoke with Vladimir Batyuk, a research fellow at the Institute for the U.S. and Canadian Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences.

http://voicerussia.com/2012_07_20/82290998/

THE BULLSHIT EXPOSED:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_4Afzc1pmo

Washington, DC – The Senate Armed Services Committee reported out a provision in the 2013 National Defense Authorization bill that requires the Comptroller General to investigate the Department of Defense’s ongoing contract with Russian state arms dealer Rosoboronexport. Human Rights First praised the effort led by Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), along with Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), noting that the investigation comes after evidence emerged about Rosoboronexport’s role in enabling the horrifying ongoing violence in Syria.

“The investigation represents a good step forward in addressing the Defense Department’s inappropriate business relationship with one of the primary enablers of Syrian atrocities,” said Human Rights First’s Sadia Hameed. “We applaud Senator Cornyn’s continual leadership on this issue over the past several months and look forward to the day when the U.S. Government stops rewarding atrocity enablers with U.S. business. Atrocity prevention must be a key determining factor in the United States’ procurement policies and should trump convenience every time.”

Russia, through Rosoboronexport, remains the top supplier of weapons to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces, and human rights organizations have reported finding Russian weapons at the site of atrocities in Syria this year. Independent reports estimate that over 10,000 civilians have been killed since the crisis started. Despite this deadly cooperation, the Department of Defense chose to enter into a nearly $1 billion, non-competitive contract with Rosoboronexport last year – after widespread human rights violations in Syria started. In addition, the United States is pro-actively choosing to extend the options on the contract, rather than ending it.

The Comptroller General’s review will make the business relationship between Department of Defense and Rosoboronexport more transparent by examining the procurement process behind the DoD-Rosoboronexport contract, as well as the availability of alternative means for the Department of Defense to procure Mi-17 helicopters and parts.

In March, Senator Cornyn led a bi-partisan group of 17 Senators to urge the Defense Department to cut ties with Rosoboronexport and took to the Senate floor with Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) to call attention to the contract. Last week, the House of Representatives passed an amendment to the NDAA prohibiting the Defense Department from entering into future contracts with any company arming the Syrian regime.

http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/2012/05/...provision/

Rosoboronexport FGUP, Moscow, Russia, was awarded a $171,380,636 firm-fixed-price contract. The award will provide for the modification of an existing contract to procure 10 additional Mi-17 helicopters.

Work will be performed in Russia, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 31, 2016. One bid was solicited, with one bid received.

The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity

http://www.defenseworld.net/go/defensene...0from%20US

The House of Representatives voted to cut off future government deals with a Russian government-owned arms contractor that has provided more than $1 billion in arms to the Syrian government. The contractor, Rosoboronexport, has supplied weapons to a brutal Syrian regime led by Bashar Al-Assad and currently has a contract with the Department of Defense (DoD) worth nearly $1 billion to supply helicopters to Afghanistan.

Representative Jim Moran (D-Va.) offered an amendment to the FY 2013 defense appropriations bill (H.R. 5856) which directs that no funding may “be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to Rosoboronexport.” The amendment passed with a resounding 407-5 vote. POGO hopes the Senate passes a similar measure.

Last month, POGO documented our concerns with the Rosoboronexport contract, under which the U.S. Army originally procured 21 Mi-17 helicopters for $377 million and later exercised an option worth $550 million to procure an additional 12 helicopters. While Representative Moran’s amendment does not affect the remainder of the current contract, it bars all future Pentagon business dealings with Rosoboronexport.

In addition to the contractor’s business with Syria, POGO also pointed out how Rosoboronexport’s business activities—including its ties to Iran’s nuclear program, which earned the company U.S. sanctions in 2006—may violate the Federal Acquisition Regulation’s (FAR) provision requiring the government to only award contracts to responsible companies. Although sanctions were lifted in 2010, Rosoboronexport has sold billions of dollars worth of weapons to Syria, which the government may have used to attack innocent civilians.

Further, Rosoboronexport’s contract with the Army was a sole-source contract that didn’t go through a rigorous bidding process. POGO has long warned about the dangers of sole-source contracts. Such contracts do not necessarily get the best product for the best price, and in this case, POGO has reason to believe that there were cheaper, domestic alternatives.

POGO also has concerns about Rosoboronexport’s classification as a small, minority-owned business at the time its contract was awarded (its classification as a small business has since been changed). According to the American Small Business League (ASBL), about 40 percent of the value of Rosoboronexport’s Army contract counted toward the government’s small business contracting goal. Rosoboronexport is responsible for roughly 80 to 90 percent of Russia’s foreign arms sales, and, according to the ASBL, has 2,500 employees and annual revenue of $424 million (both of which exceed federal small business standards).

In March, a group of 17 senators sent a bipartisan letter to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta urging him to cut off funding to Rosoboronexport. Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) put additional pressure on Obama, blocking the appointment of the Army Assistant Secretary for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics and sending letters to high-ranking DoD officials.

The Obama Administration and the Senate need to officially act, but the House approval of Moran’s amendment is a good step in holding Rosoboronexport responsible.

http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2012/07...xport.html

Five suppliers competing for a U.S. military contract have invited Rosoboronexport to act as a sub-contractor, the Moscow- based company said today in an e-mailed statement. The ammunition would be used in international coalition operations, it said.

The U.S. barred transactions with Rosoboronexport from 2006 to 2010, citing its arms sales to nations including Iran and Syria as violating efforts to curb proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The lifting of the sanctions coincided with Russia’s support of a United Nations resolution expressing concern over Iran’s nuclear program, according to the Congressional Research Service.

The U.S. Army agreed last May to pay $375 million for 21 Russian-made MI-17 helicopters for the Afghan air force, which has been flying the craft for 30 years. Some U.S. lawmakers have urged the Pentagon to cancel the helicopter contract because Russia remains a top arms supplier to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-08...-u-s-.html