WASHINGTON, September 27 — The United States has offered to sell arms to China, an overture that lands squarely on top of a regulatory framework built to restrict exactly that kind of trade. The source material does not specify the date, venue or terms of the offer. What is documented is the machinery it collides with.
The Bureau of Industry and Security, an agency of the Commerce Department, published a series of new regulations governing the exportation of goods from the United States, with particular emphasis on exports to China and to certain Chinese entities. The changes were the subject of a webinar announced on August 26, 2020, and scheduled for September 9, 2020, running from 9:00 am to 10:15 am CT, aimed at counsel and trade compliance professionals.
That session reviewed how the changes applied to the definition of military end-user and end-use, and to the “direct product rule” under the revised regulations. The stated goal was to provide the tools needed for compliant facilitation of trade activities. Notably, the framing was permissive rather than prohibitive — compliance as an enabler, not merely a barrier.
Enforcement on the other side of the ledger
The regulatory tightening sits within a broader enforcement landscape. A 29-year-old citizen of the People’s Republic of China pleaded guilty in federal court in Salt Lake City to violating the Arms Export Control Act, after attempting to illegally procure military-grade satellite gear for export to China. That case is the salient point for anyone weighing the president’s offer.
The Arms Export Control Act is not decorative. It produces guilty pleas in American courtrooms.
The U.S. framework is one of several national arms export control regimes under scrutiny internationally. In the United Kingdom, campaigners and a new report from CAAT UK argued that Britain’s “rigged and broken” arms export policies have “eviscerated international humanitarian law.” Reporting by The New Arab found that the UK kept Israel arms flowing despite Gaza evidence. A little-known UK consultancy, Touché Ltd, recorded 194 potential arms export licence uses for Israel, according to Action on Armed Violence.
In Canada, a Liberal MP said he was demoted for supporting an NDP bill targeting arms export controls. Ukraine, two and a half months into its post-invasion period, had yet to issue a single arms export permit, per ubn.news.
Separately, China said its own export controls target Japan’s military uses, as reported by China Daily, and an arms broker was jailed for 16 years over Libya and Sudan jet deals.
What to watch
For all the noise, the practical question is whether an offer to sell arms to China can be squared with a regulatory apparatus explicitly designed to constrain exports to China and to certain Chinese entities. The BIS regulations, the Salt Lake City guilty plea, and the international licensing disputes together define the current state of arms export control law and policy. Watch whether the offer is followed by any adjustment to the military end-user definition or the direct product rule — or by nothing at all.
