COCOM Is Dead, Long Live COCOM: Persistence and Change in Multilateral Security Institutions

Abstract

Members of the Co-ordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls (COCOM) agreed to disband this 'economic arm of NATO' as of March 1994. Despite the demise of COCOM, member states agreed to continue applying their existing export control policies and, in December 1995, replaced COCOM with the Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies. Such actions are in contrast to conventional views about a likely decline in co-operation among COCOM members with the end of the Soviet threat. After providing a brief history of COCOM operations, we derive six categories of multilateral co-operative behaviours and assess evidence for COCOM in each category for two five-year periods, 1985-89 and 1990-94. We find that multilateral co-operation in this security institution not only increased in most categories in the last years of the Cold War, but increased in every category after 1989. We then review the possible explanations for the increase in co-operation, and find that the emergence of a liberal community identity among COCOM members explains this outcome better than more conventional theoretical approaches.So soon, however, as ultimate victory seems assured, the consciousness of separate interests tends to overshadow the sense of common purpose … And the jealousies, rivalries and suspicions which in any protracted war arise between partners to an Alliance generate poisons which war-wearied arteries are too inelastic to eliminate.Harold Nicolson, The Congress of Vienna 1 After more than forty years service as the Western economic bulwark against Soviet communism, the member states of the Co-ordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls (COCOM) agreed to disband the arrangement with effect from 31 March 1994. 2 The member states of COCOM failed to agree on the creation of a new mechanism to co-ordinate their respective export control policies by this self-imposed deadline. The same officials, however, continued

La sociologie de « l’état en action » au prisme des relations internationales

“…23. Sur l'accord de Wassenaar, voir Auer (2005) ; Beck (2000) ; Craft, Grillot (1999) ; Cupitt, Grillot (1997) ; Lipson (1999Lipson ( , 2006…”

Space Technology Export Controls and International Cooperation in Outer Space

“…55 Both the EAR and ITAR cover "deemed exports" and "re-exports." 55 22 C.F.R. 57 A deemed export under ITAR covers the discourse or transference of any defense article or defense service (including technical data) to a foreign person in the United States.…”

“…-Fourth, the 1990s marked the beginning of a market re-orientation as between satellite manufacturing and service providers. 55 Zelnio, supra n. 283, at 228. 54 As a result, manufacturers with ownership interests in these companies lost captured customers and now had to compete openly for a contract award.…”

“…55 Therefore the decision to transfer or deny transfer of any item is the sole responsibility of each Participating State. This is a recommendation in line with the Escalation Approach.…”

“…52 Id. 55 See International Atomic Energy Agency Statute, Article 3 (5): "[The IAEA is authorized] To establish and administer safeguards designed to ensure that special fissionable and other materials, services, equipment, facilities, and information made available by the Agency or at its request or under its supervision or control are not used in such a way as to further any military purpose; and More recently, the development by Iran of a space launch vehicle has raised concern amongst certain space-active members of the international community.…”