Small arms, and the global trade in them, have greater political implications than perhaps any other commodity. The black market in guns is the lifeblood of modern piracy, terrorism, insurgency, and the violent forms of organized crime. Aside from the direct impact of these destructive social ills, the trade has a more subtle but perhaps more dangerous secondary effect — the corruption inherent in gunrunning erodes the integrity of the state. As one of its practitioners put it, “gunrunning rolls on the ball bearings of bribery”. There can be few things more damaging to the security of a state than the loss of effective control of such a politically dangerous commodity, yet states flirt with this very thing every day through grey market arms transfers that so often end up supplying the black market. Whether they conduct these transfers actively through their intelligence agencies, or passively by allowing licensed dealers or manufacturers to do it, governments are ultimately involved. They must weigh the costs and benefits of these activities against the stability of the international state system which all governments support and depend upon to some degree. This system demands that states have a monopoly on the use of force within their sovereign borders. For this they require firearms, yet not all governments have the capacity to produce these weapons. This is the raison d'être of the white market and why it is absolutely vital to the state system. It is also the reason states cannot reach consensus on how to regulate arms transfers of any shade of grey.

The Current State of the Sulu Arms Market

The three-year period following the 11 September terrorist attacks on the United States marked a watershed for the Sulu Arms Market. Aside from the obvious global repercussions of that horrible event, there was a convergence of regional developments, some related to 11 September, some not, that also affected the trade. These events had two principal effects on the Sulu Arms Market as a destination for guns.