Trends and Sources of Proliferation of Small Arms in South Asia : Impact on Politics
At the threshold of the 21st century, the concept of modern warfare needs rethinking. According to Aaron Karp, throughout the presentcentury, images of warfare were dominated by major weapons systems in which war was synonymous with the use of technically sophisticated tanks and aircraft, ships and missiles. However, in the twenty-firstcentury this image may be all but irrelevant. The nature of conflict around the world is changing, and with it, the instruments of human strife.¹ Weapons of mass destruction that are still dominating strategic thinking remain in the background, rather the flow of small arms and light weapons is becoming most relevant to the incidents of internal conflicts and the outcome of recent wars.^.2 In Karp’s words, “no longer is the greatest challenge of arms trade policy the riddle of controlling the trade in major weapons between nations; rather, it is the problem of addressing the flow of small and light arms to fragile governments andsub-state groups.”³ By the end of 1994, of the 49 wars in progress, small arms and light weapons were the primary source of violence in all of them while in 46 of them they were the only means.⁴ South Asia, home of one fifth of humanity living in seven developing states with fragile ethnic and social structure presents a case in point where proliferation of small arms and spread of internal conflicts with crossborder implication go hand in hand. Against this backdrop, the present chapter provides an overview of the pattern of proliferation of small arms in South Asia and its linkage in general with politicalprocess in the South Asian countries. However, to view the dynamics of small arms proliferation in a broader perspective, sources of small weapons at a general level are outlined.

Source of Weapons Procurement (i) The State as the Supplier: According to Jane’s InfantryWeapons, small arms are procured mainly from the developed countries like USA, Russia/former USSR, France, Britain, Germany, China,Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Czechoslovakia, Israel, Singapore, SouthAfrica, Spain, Switzerland, and Yugoslavia. In addition, many third world countries manufacture small arms and light weapons on their own with licensing agreements with major suppliers.⁵However, the traditional art of weapons trade that was confined to state-to-state armstransfer, became complicated after 1945 as government sales were made no longer only of surplus munitions (that were not needed for a country’s own military purpose), but also for arming allies or friendly insurgents. Of the limited information available on sales of small arms, unlike on that of major weapons which is freely available, a study shows that US government’s international sale of selected light weapons included 132,466 M16 rifles, 15,005 M14 rifles, 10,421 grenade launchers, 30,178 M1911.45-cal. pistols, 1.4 million M67 hand grenades, and 211,408 M18A1 anti-personnel mines sold to foreign governments through the State Department between 1980 and 1993. Major customers included Bahrain, El Salvador, Lebanon, andThailand.⁶The US provided foreign governments with $55.2 billion worth of arms and ammunition under the Military Assistance Programme (MAP) between 1950 and 1994 in addition to another $ 6.5b worth of excess military hardware. Of these perhaps 10 to 20 per cent were small arms.⁷Big powers make covert transfers to friendly insurgents in the form of grants, gifts, and sales and to separatist groups in foreigncountries. In 1975-76 the CIA provided anti-communist insurgents in Angola 622 crew-served mortars, 42,100 anti tank rockets, 20,900 rifles and millions of rounds of ammunitions.^.8Similarly, the former Soviet Union and China supplied their respective allies with arms andammunitions, and military assistance including training. During the war in Afghanistan, the Soviets aided Najibullah’s government whilePakistan took arms from China and USA. Thus, in almost all of theon-going conflicts, a major source of supply of arms was made by the governments directly or indirectly. The nature of the transfer and its transparency dimension, depends on the pattern in the transaction, as may be seen below:

(ii) Theft from Government Arsenals: Stealing arms and ammunitions from national storehouses has become a common source of illicit arms procurement. Economic compulsions, political motives, lack of security etc. are often the cause of theft from government warehouses that are stored with modern and improved weapons and ammunitions. The act of stealing and their illegal sales are in most cases made/perpetuated by the storekeepers and the security personnel themselves. During the war in Afghanistan, of the original 900 Stinger SAMS that the US supplied to Pakistan to deliver to the Mujahideen, as many as 560 were untraceable. There were reports that 312 of these were sold in Landi Kotal market in January 1993.⁹ Cases that reported theft of small arms and light weapons fromstorehouses increased after the break-up of the Soviet Union when law and order had deteriorated in the former communist countries.In Russia and the former Soviet states, poverty, unemployment, frustration and other socioeconomic compulsions forced men in uniform to sell their own weapons to arms traders. (iii) Transnational Criminal Organizations: As the world enters the next century, control over key economic and trade decisions isgradually shifting from state authorities to transnational economicinstitutions. Criminal enterprises are benefiting from the declininginterference of state regulations by operating on a global scale, moving contraband to places where there is market. These have been termed as Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCO) meaning ‘large andsophisticated entities that operate like multinational corporations.’ It has been assumed that the TCO, with their increased reach andeffectiveness, are better poised to supply arms and ammunitions toinsurgents and separatist groups that depend on illicit purchases to meet their military demand.¹⁰ These criminal organizations have closelinkages with a variety of illegal trades such as drug trade, goldsmuggling, arms trade etc. thereby building a strong underworldnetwork. Their power to defy national and international laws stem from the fact that TCOs not only possess money-power, but also very strong linkages with influential individuals including politicians. South Asia is no exception in this connection, as there are many such powerful entities in the region that provide arms to insurgents, terrorist and other criminals.

(iv) The Black Market:Another source of arms procurement is through trade in the black market. The trade is legal when arm dealers including manufacturing firms sell the desired weapons throughofficial channels. However, the trade becomes illegal when sales are made secretly without official registration. Illicit arms transfer has been the common source of arms procurement in recent times. Arms traded in the black markets and even being shipped to foreign countries are cold war phenomena that continue to this day, if not having worsened. All kinds of small arms and light weapons are found in these black areas and their prices vary from time to time. In South Asia, most of the arms that the insurgents get hold of are purchased from illegal dealers whose sources can range from theft to actual purchase from middle men. In fact, it appears that a gun changes many hands before it gets into those of the end user. Although black markets are supposed to be secret meeting places for the seller and the buyer, they are not always so. In the North Western Frontiers of Pakistan (NWFP), arms are sold openly to locals and foreigners allegedly with the knowledge of the authorities there.

(v) Local Production: Until a few decades ago, armswere mostly imported or smuggled in from foreign countries or arms traders.Gradually the art of making ones own weapons became familiar and more practised. The main incentives for locally producing small arms and light weapons are the following:

(a) Since the end of the Cold War, US’ and Russia’s military aid to insurgents came to a halt. For instance,in the case of South Asia, the withdrawal of former Soviet Union from Afghanistan and the decline of US pipeline of arms to Pakistan compelled local arms markets to develop to meet the demand;

(b) Smuggling weapons into the country were often risky as it had to pass through the ever increasing tight border security. The risk of being caught, on the one hand, and depending too much on the transnational underworld of arms trafficking on the other hand could be reduced if some types were locally produced; and, (c) Locally produced weapons turned out to be cheaper thanimported arms and thus, the demand for home-made arms increased, raising the profit side of the business as well. In Pakistan, counterfeits of imported weapons which are available openly at the Darra’ Bazaar in the North Western Frontier Province have also attracted neighbouring buyers. Hence, it could be observed: firstly, transactions in small armsusually involves many hands; secondly, it is in most cases linked to trade in other commodities, usually contraband and illegal goods; thirdly, the more transactions are linked to illegal goods and made by non-state actors, the less transparent they become.

Proliferation of Small Arms in South Asia
Detailed data of the quantity and origins of small arms in South Asia are not available. However, it is indisputable knowledge that this region contains a very large number of light weapons acquired both through transfer, trade and local production.¹¹The quantity and quality of arms that have increased the volume of arms available in South Asia is a result of the political and security environment prevailing since the independence of India and Pakistan. There is a further increase after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Historically, the politico-security atmosphere in the aftermath of the Second World War did not escape the South Asian region. The ideological rift between the capitalist and communist bloc led by the USA and the Soviet Union respectively was reflected in this region in the form of proxy wars, arms race, inter-state conflict etc. The instability in South Asia reached its height during the war in Afghanistan in the late 1970s. Although Afghanistan is not usuallyconsidered to be within South Asia, developments in this countrycertainly has an impact on its neighbours. Pakistan’s security, forinstance, was very much affected by the set up of the Soviet backed puppet government of Najibullah in Kabul. Islamabad developed a hot line with Washington that made sure that Pakistan’s army was well equipped with millions of dollars worth of arms. Currently, there are allegations that the spread of small arms and light weapons in thePakistan-Afghanistan region has reached a saturation point. Over 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles are believed to be available in Karachi alone that are outside government control. In the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, the figure is as high as 3 million. In the NWFP district of Dir, the population in 1992 was 1.2 million when 2 million weapons were reported to be available.¹²In the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, totalnumber of Kalashnikov assault rifles may be as high as 3 million while 13-25 million landmines were assessed in the same region.¹³

In South Asia, the largest consumers of small arms are the non-state actors comprising of insurgent groups, separatists, terrorists, drugcartels, extortionists and criminals. According to one expert on small arms, this is a global trend in which small arms have diffused throughout the world, into all levels of society rather than proliferated.According to him, proliferation suggests “an increase in thenumber of weapons possessed by certain governments, or in the number of states possessing a particular weapon system.” On the other hand, “diffusion suggests the dispersion of arms within societies, extending not only to governments and state owned entities but also to private armies and militias, insurgent groups, criminal organizations and other non-state actors.¹⁴

The weaponry used by the insurgents has improved from 1984onwards. With US support, automatic AK-47 replaced the old British rifles and recoilless guns, heavy machine guns and rockets were flown in from Pakistan to Afghanistan.¹⁵Copious quantities of Kalashnikov varieties were found in ample in South Asia such as the AK-47, Type 56, Simonov and Dragunor rifles; RPG-7 anti-tank rocket launchers with rockets and varieties of machine guns including the Soviet shoulder fired Strela (SAM-7 anti-air craft).The year 1986 marked a turning point when weapons of much greater sophistication started to flow into the region.

There was a significant policy turnaround by the CIA whenweapons other than the Soviet brands were introduced, namely, the American General Dynamics Stinger, The Franco-German anti-tank rocket Milan, Spanish 120 Mar mortars etc. Among the newly introduced weapons, the ‘stinger’ proved to be the most effective. In the Afghan war it was instrumental in changingthe course of the war and thereby accelerating Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan.¹⁷By way of comparison it may be noted that the Soviet origin ‘Strela’ attacked 47 air crafts with 510 firing, while the improved version downed 269aircraft hit by 340.¹⁸

Factors Contributing to Illicit Arms Proliferation in South Asia
Conflict and Arms Nexus: The cases of conflicts within the state have outnumbered the number of incidents of inter-state conflicts. These conflicts stem from different kinds of demands by a section of the population, in most cases a minority group, demanding for more autonomy, a separate homeland or attempting to overthrow the government. Inalmost all countries of South Asia there are many examples of insurgency or guerrilla warfare where the insurgents or rebels are in most of the cases, supplied with arms by a foreign country that is sympathetic to their cause or has its national interest at stake. Religious fanaticism and ethno-nationalism have been the main factor behind many conflicts in South Asia. The Hindu-Muslim riots in the aftermath of the independence of India and Pakistan in 1947, the boiling crisis in Kashmir and the Punjab crisis in India, in Pakistan the liberation movement by its eastern wing in 1971 that led to the creation of Bangladesh, the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) issue in Bangladesh itself, the Tamilseparatist movement in Sri Lanka etc. are to name only a few examples that highlight the linkage between small arms procurement and conflict in South Asia. The traditional practice to aid insurgents with arms and ammunitions continues even after the Cold War is over. Although thehegemonic tendencies of the super powers are no longer physically present in the region, their pipeline of military assistance continues. Weapons obtained by means of such transactions are popular among rebels because of their relative light weight and simple techniques. Also the price is affordable and in recent years, counterfeit arms are being produced locally, thereby making them easily available in localmarkets. Arms and Drugs Nexus: Another cause for the illicit transfer of arms is the arms and drug nexus in the sub-continent. South Asia is at the crossroads of the famous drug trafficking routes, such as the Golden Triangle. To be more precise this part of the region is flanked by two of the most biggest producers of opium: namely Myanmar in the east and Afghanistan in the west. In Myanmar, according to the United Nations Drug Control Programme (UNDCP), opium cultivation has increased since 1988, with over 146,600 hectares under cultivation most of which is near the country’s borders with China and Thailand.¹⁹The Americans played an important role in Myanmar’s growing opium industry. The US in their support for the Koumintang were believed to ferry weapons and drugs out of the country with the help of the Taiwanese.²⁰

On the opposite flank, Afghanistan was another nexus for drugs and arms. Similar to the Myanmar case, here too the opium industry grew in response to the need for sustaining the war against the Najibullah government by the Mujahideen rebels. In 1994, Afghanistan remained the second largest opium producer in the world according to USestimates.²¹Gradually, the drug operation spread in neighbouringcountries especially in Pakistan. Drug money was used for purchase of arms. In fact, there are reports that suggest that drug money was institutionalized by banks such as the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) in which the founder of the Bank, Aga Hasan Abedi was found guilty for laundering the massive profits from drug operations and was suspected to have funded Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme.²²

The drug trade and arms proliferation are inter-linked for manyreasons. Of these, the two noticeable causes are the need for security and the need for new markets. From the security angle, the drug dealers need protection to move the bulk of the contraband item from one place to another, and thus, build-up their own army. The other obvious reason is the profit motive in which the drug lords need to expand their market from time to time. In the case of Myanmar and Afghanistan, we see how cleverly the drug lords have created a market for narcotics: first, by financing the separatists and other disgruntled people with arms in return for which the poor rebels engaged in poppy cultivation; secondly, by ensuring a market for the end product by increasing drug consumption in those and neighbouring area even when the war is over.

Crime and Small Arms Nexus: Demand for arms does not remain confined to insurgents and drug cartels alone. In recent times arms are bought by large criminal gangs that engage in activities that range from a simple theft to extortion. In South Asia, socio-economic backwardness is one of the prime causes for the increase in crime. Poverty,unemployment, illiteracy, inadequate housing, are to name a few of the factors that are directly or indirectly responsible for the youth to be drawn into the world of crime. With time, the improvised, primitive weapons are being gradually replaced by small arms to demonstrate their muscle-power over their victims. While cases of crime may appear to be looked upon as individual incidents, at the broader perspective there is a large underworld network operating by a powerful group making profits from selling and sometimes even renting out weapons to criminals. Thus, the demand for weapons by the criminals and theavailability of small arms bring the two closer.

Arms and Politics Nexus: The relation between arms and politics in South Asia should no longer be regarded as a trivial problem. Theproblem exists and is a major threat to the internal security and development of a state. For too long the linkage between arms and politics has remained under wraps while the nexus between arms and drugs, arms and insurgencies, arms and terrorism were given prominence. Yet, in recent times, political crime is increasing in almost all South Asian countries. Politicians directly or indirectly support and sponsor terrorism, engage in criminal offenses including manslaughter in order to achieve political gains, to take revenge or annihilate adversaries. Hence, the demand for arms arises among political parties to the extent that in some of the South Asian countries, politicians are alleged to have their own armed cadres. While the subject of linkage betweenpolitics and arms will be dealt in greater detail later on, it is sufficient to say at this stage that political motive is one reason for small arms procurement in South Asia.

Arms and Profit Nexus: The commercial aspect of the arms trade was formerly restricted to arms transfer made by the state and by arms manufacturing firms. But the trade over the years has become wider and more complex. In the initial years following 1945, states made profits by selling weapons from their stockpiles to their allies and later tonon-state actors. With time the huge profit lured individuals into the business of arms trade. The trade becomes more profitable because of its clandestine nature and also because it could be linked to the clandestine trades such as gold, narcotics and other banned items. In the form of barter trade, a group of influential people such as the Mafia were creating new markets for their products. Myanmar is a case in point. The rebels in Burma produced opium and sold to warlords whosupplied them with arms in return. Socio-economic disparities were also compulsions for the unemployed youth to be lured into this business.

Nature of Politics in South Asia

South Asia is one of the most diverse regions of the world. Itsdiversity in language, culture and religion not only crosses borders but also exists within national boundaries. As a result of its heterogeneous characteristics, one of the greatest challenge for the South Asian statesmen is to maintain peace within and outside the country. But, such a task is rendered very difficult due to the internal and external variables that influence South Asian politics.

South Asian politics is to a large extent Indo-centric. Almost all the countries of South Asia have at least one common border with India. Sri Lanka and Maldives are exceptions but their geographical proximity to India puts them in a position similar to the rest of the South Asian countries. As a result of the geographical reality, India is the cornerstone of not only the foreign policies but also the domestic politics of all the South Asian countries. Moreover, inter-state relations between South Asian countries are asymmetric in the sense that unequal power relationship exists between the countries. India is big in terms ofpopulation, military power and GNP. India’s neighbours have atendency to perceive India as their source of threat to security, while India considers its neighbours as an integral part of its own security system.²³India’s interference into the internal affairs of its neighbours does not make their sense of ‘India-phobia’ unfounded. India’s support which included alleged military assistance to the Tamil Separatists in Sri lanka and the Shantibahini in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) are only a few examples of Indian interference in domestic affairs of its neighbours.

All South Asian countries (excepting Bhutan) are in their nascent stage of democracy with the exception of India, which has a longer history of democracy. Although Pakistan emerged as a nation-state at around the same time as India, it was not until recently that democracy was ushered in with the holding of free and fair elections. 23 out of 38 years of her independent life, Pakistan has spent under direct or indirect military rule²⁴. Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal soon followed suit in their run for democracy. In Nepal the King was forced by popular demand to introduce parliamentary system after which he remains as a mere symbol as the Head of State of Nepal. In Bangladesh, popular uprising in 1990 ended the long nine years of dictatorship that wasfollowed by free and fair elections in the country. Yet, due to longautocratic rule in almost all the South Asian countries, democraticfoundations are still weak. Basic democratic institutions such as the Parliament or the Judiciary system as well as basic democratic rights such as freedom of speech, human rights etc., are yet to be established in order for political systems to operate smoothly.

The South Asian countries, except for Bhutan and Nepal, werecolonies of the European powers. Each gained independence afterpopular upsurge that stemmed not from the grassroot level, rather from a section of people who received education from the West and belonged to the elite class. As a result, the political structure, political beliefsystems, political culture etc. in this part of the world are elite-based, creating a wide gap between rulers and the masses.

Internal conflicts are perhaps the most distinctive feature of South Asia, which is likely to remain for a long time. Separatist or secessionist movements are a common phenomena that have their roots in ethnic, religious, or racial differences. The majority rule over the minority has created a complex set of problems in this part of the world that finds expression in intra-state strife. In fact, religion, caste and language have had vast serious and at times sinistrous potentialities of politicization. In India, the Punjab crisis, the Kashmir issue, the insurgencies in the Northeastern flank of India have all plagued the country for the last several years. In Pakistan, the case is similar with the Mohajir Quami Movement (MQM), and the crisis in the provinces of Sindh and Baluchistan. The ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka caused by the minority Tamils against the majority Sinhalese over a separate homeland for the former has led to a civil war in the island state for over a decade now. In Bangladesh, though the scale was much smaller, the impact was not different. The tribal insurgency in the Chittagong Hill Tracts that started with the demand for more autonomy culminated in the demand for a Jummaland. Unrest in the CHT had cost the lives of innocent people, not to mention the deterioration of law and order situation there.

Politicization of religion has occasionally been the primary cause for riots and political violence among Hindus and Muslims in theIndian subcontinent. In a multi-religious region like South Asia, any sort or religious extremism is detrimental to its stability. The political philosophies of the BJP in India or the Islamic fundamentalism inPakistan and Bangladesh have raised questions as to whether their roles help divide rather than unite the people in their respective countries.

In this complex South Asian politicalsetting the infusion of small arms and light weapons has rendered ‘politics’ apolitical, commercial and above all violent.

The Role of Small Arms in South Asia Politics

In South Asian politics, arms have played an intricate role, more so in domestic politics than in their inter-state relations. Since 1947, four regular wars took place in which the military of more than one state participated. (Pakistan-India in 1947, China-India in 1962, Pakistan-India in 1965 and Pakistan-India in 1971) However, the number ofirregular type of wars have been much higher.²⁵A great number of the weaponry used in these wars are small arms and light weapons. These arms have a direct relation to the internal instability of the countries as they are used as the main instrument of violence. In other words, it is possible that if there had been the absence of arms, the issue of contention would have remained confined to peaceful demonstrations or other approaches of non-violence. However, as it appears in the case of South Asia, any kind of political dissent between state and non-state actors finds expression in the form of violence in which small arms are the main instrument.

From newspaper reports of arms frequently seized from non-state actors such as insurgents, it is apparent that these low-cost weapons have become an indispensable part of South Asian political scenario. Thus, the nexus between arms and politics lies in the potential power that such instruments have in order to serve the interest of state and non-state actors. The extent and nature of the insurgencies and guerrilla warfare in South Asia are a direct result of proliferation of arms. Political demands such as more autonomy, a separate home-state etc. could have never sustained for so long had there been no proliferation of small arms and light weapons in such a massive scale.

Linkages between sub-state groups and arms across boundaries are common. Reports of arms seized in one country for the political use of rebels of another country are well-known. For instance in 1997, one consignment of sophisticated arms reportedly for the Naga rebels in India was harled at Cox’s. Bazaar.²⁶Continuation of the war in Afghanistan exemplified the role of light weapons. An estimated $ 6 billion worth of arms were reported to have been pushed through the pipeline of Afghanistan. The arms came from China, Egypt and Israel and South Africa²⁷. Weapons acquisition through donation procurement or appropriation is critical for a military capability and capacity to oppose the state. Often a militant group will attempt to procure small arms,gradually shifting towards light weapons and increasingly towards more sophisticated armaments.²⁸

Due to the easy proliferation of arms in South Asia, politics has become prone to violence. However, a dangerous dimension to it was added with the advent of terrorism, drug trafficking and guerrillawarfare aimed directly to destabilize regimes and erode the power of the state. The conventional inhibitions of not targeting the helpless seemed to disappear. The Kashmir issue, the MQM, CHT and so on are all intra-state conflicts where non-state actors destabilize the State. In the case of India, its internal troubles with insurgents carry potential force of destabilization. For example, as series of riots in 1948-49, 1950, 1955, 1961 and 1971-72 witnessed the violent outburst of Assamese linguistic nationalism.²⁹

In almost all South Asian countries political violence is a common phenomenon. Armed clash between non-state and state actors following protest, strikes, demonstration etc. is an oft-practiced art of politics in this region. Armed conflicts could have been short-lived and less violenthad small arms not entered the scenario as it has in recent times. As a result of its easy proliferation, conflicts are able to sustain in spite of military response by the government. In the case of CHT, the Shantibahini were a few in number in comparison to the troopsdeployed in their area. Yet, for the last 20 years or so they fought against the state. Such continuity is only possible due to the availability of small arms and light weapons. The same applies to the Tamils, the Kashmiri militants, the rebels in the Northeastern state of India. In contrast, when the flow of arms ceases totally or partially, the conflict is less likely to sustain with the same vigor and might, as it so happened in the case of Afganistan’s Mujahideens.

South Asian countries are in their nascent stage of democracy. In any democratic country, accountable and transparent institutions areprerequisites for the proper functioning of the state. There appears to be the absence of confidence between the State and its citizens. The fusion of light weapons and small arms into the political process has brought a setback for the development of democracy in South Asia. The basic characteristic of democracy is forming a government through free and fair elections. Even that right has been abused in many countries of South Asia. Vote-rigging, threats to election candidates, voting under threat of personal safety etc. are the result of proliferation of small arms among political parties. According to one author, “the electoral system has been perverted by money and muscle-power to serve the interest of the rich and powerful, apart from feudal, communal and caste elements.”³⁰During the recent Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections, the state police apparently had compiled a report in which 75 criminal gangs operating in the state were enlisted. 55 of them were said to have linkswith political parties and leaders of at least a dozen gangs were found to be MLAs or MPs. The Samajwadi Party patronized 25 gangs,Congress 13, BSP 8, BJP and Congress (Tewari) seven each³¹. Moreover automatic Rifles of the AK varieties had been distributed in Uttar Pradesh by the Bihar Coal Mafia to influence the voters.³²Although the police knew which criminal gangs had procured these arms, they were unable to take action against them because every gang enjoys politicalpatronage.”³³

Politics in some of the South Asian countries have established an uderworld network that links organized crime, drugs trafficking, arms smuggling and money laundering. A form of money laundering called Hawala funds was supposedly given to Hindu fundamentalists who were responsible for the demolition of the Babri Masjid, and also to theMuslims who organized the Bombay bomb blasts. Hawala money was said to be given to the Kashmiri secessionists and to politicians.³⁴As a result, reports claim that, “crime syndicates have taken law into their own hands ... developing an extensive network and contact with thebureaucratic government functionaries at the local levels, politicians. Network of the Mafia is virtually running a parallel government,pushing the state apparatus into irrelevance”.³⁵

The arms-politics-drugs nexus is also a common phenomenon that has dangerous fall-outs for the society. Opium is produced in 10 out of 29 provinces in Afghanistan. Of the ten, eight are under the control of the Taliban producing 2,214 metric ton of opium - roughly 96% of total annual output in Afghanistan. The drugs are trafficked out to Western Europe and America through Pakistan, India and Central Asian Republics. And in return, huge quantities of small arms and light weapons aretrafficked in.

The casualties of death and injury are perhaps the most disturbing & distressing side of South Asian politics. Firing, bombing, killing are the after-effects of armed politics. According to one author, people died mostly in civil wars and intra-state conflicts and the weapons employed there were found to be in the category of small arms and minor weapons. Reports show that in 1990 as many as 16 ongoing conflicts and wars had claimed 2632,000 civilian lives.³⁷In the 1980s, the proportion of civilian deaths rose to 74% of the total deaths in armed conflicts and in 1990 it appears to be close to 90%.³⁸The war in Afghanistan is said to have cost nearly 500,000 lives and still there is little prospect of stability. The weapons have percolated to drug Mafia to maintain entire armies. A number of 560 stinger SAMS still remain unaccounted for posing a great threat to aviation activities.³⁹Ethnic and communalviolence in India since early 1980s reached their highest since independence. Between 1983–1986, around 10,000 people were killed invarious separatist, ethnic and religious violence.⁴⁰ According to the Human Rights Watch Arms Project, militancy in the Indian border region took a gian’s leap in the late 1980s, with a sudden upsurge in weapons both in Kashmir and Punjab. Where there had been 12 gauge shotguns and a few Stens, the influx of sophisticated weapons resulted in a dramatic increase in instances of violence on the unarmed civilian population. Seizures began to rise to 398 in 1988, to none two years earlier.⁴¹ Weapons that were captured in Jammu and Kashmir regions were found to be ‘identical’ to those identical provided by the ISI to theAfghan Mujahideen. Again, identical weapons of the Afghan war were seen in Bosnia, Sri Lanka and Azerbaijan.⁴²As a result of this unrelenting cycle we already have nearly 60 million variants of Kalashnikov rifles distributed worldwide with a fair share in the hands of the undersirable.⁴³

Conclusion It appears that proliferation of small arms into South Asian politics has social, economic and political implications that may threaten the internal and external security of an individual country. In a nutshell, small arms are a threat to national security as a whole and also cause a direct threat to individual. The long term impact of armed politics is harmful to political development. The use or the threat to use force has deep-rooted sociological implications that can hamper an individual’s perception of politics and political development. In the region that gave birth to politics of non-violence, it is a tragedy to witness Mahatma Gandhi’s political philosophy uprooted only to be replaced by destructive politics such as riots, terrorism, political killings etc. The traditional conflicts waged by sub-state groups such as the Kashmirimilitants, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam (LTTE) in Sri Lanka, the Shantibahini in the CHT initially received sympathy. But theirruthlessness have turned public opinion against them. The problem is nowhere more acute than in the case ofBangladesh where arms are not confined to the CHT or the Shantibahinis. A country that is one of the most homogeneous entities in South Asia is nevertheless a victim of the fusion between arms and politics. In the following chapter, an overview of the proliferation of small arms in Bangladesh is discussed.

^44.Dikshit, J. Singh (ed.), op. cit., p.46.