Lancet criticises its owner for hosting international arms fair
BMJ 2005; 331 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.331.7517.591-a (Published 15 September 2005) Cite this as: BMJ 2005;331:591Data supplement
Lancet criticises its owner for hosting arms fair London
Owen Dyer
The Lancet has criticised its owner and publisher, Reed Elsevier, for involvement in the global arms trade. Reed Elsevier owns the company Spearhead Exhibitions, which this week hosted the defence systems and equipment international (DSEi) exhibition, one of the largest military exhibitions in the world, in London.
In an editorial published last week the Lancet said that it "has a long record of drawing attention to the adverse health consequences of war and violence" and that the editors "reject completely any perceived connection between the journal and the arms trade, no matter how tangential it might be" (Lancet 2005;366:868).
But the publisher’s presence in the arms industry, the editors argue, "self-evidently damages its reputation as a health-science publisher . . . we respectfully ask Reed Elsevier to divest itself of all business interests that threaten human, and especially civilian, health and well-being."
The editors only recently learned of their publisher’s connections, from a letter sent by a group of doctors and scientists, which also appeared in last week’s issue (2005;366:889).
The letter notes that Reed Elsevier subscribes to the United Nations’ global compact on ethical business practices, which demands that companies "make sure that they are not complicit in human rights abuses."
Stephen Cowden, company secretary of Reed Elsevier, wrote in a letter defending his company’s involvement, also published in last week’s journal (2005;366:889-90), that "the defence industry is necessary for upholding national security for the preservation of democratic values."
When Catherine May, a spokeswoman for Reed Elsevier, was asked by the BMJ whether certain countries, such as Libya, Pakistan, Vietnam, and Saudi Arabia, whose representatives were attending the fair, could be considered interested in "the preservation of democratic values," she said that the company had no say in determining which national delegations could attend—that was decided by the Ministry of Defence.
The Lancet editorial also criticised previous DSEi exhibitions for allowing exhibits from manufacturers of cluster bombs. At the 2003 exhibition, which took place shortly after Reed Elsevier acquired Spearhead Exhibitions, the UK newspaper the Guardian reported finding cluster bombs on show despite a request from organisers to keep them out of view (www.guardian.co.uk, "Welcome: this way for cluster bombs," 10 Sep 2003).
This year, Ms May said, a list of weapons that may not be exhibited was issued, and teams of inspectors would close any stand that breached the rule. The list was not publicly available, but cluster bombs were among the banned items, she said. "About 30% of the exhibits are actually equipment related to peacekeeping and search and rescue work," she added.
Dr Tom Stafford, of Sheffield University’s psychology department, one of the authors of the letter criticising Reed Elsevier, said: "Running this kind of arms fair may be legal, but it isn’t moral and it certainly isn’t appropriate for a scientific and medical publisher. I suspect that the majority of scientists and medics would not want to be associated with this aspect of Reed Elsevier’s activities. The editors of the Lancet certainly don’t.
"Secondly, defence may be vital to democracy and humanitarian missions, but the way the arms trade currently conducts itself is notoriously poorly regulated, unaccountable, and secretive. These abuses will continue at DSEi 2005, and Elsevier makes itself complicit in them. Elsevier is putting profit above humanitarian values—just like the arms trade as a whole."
Related articles
- News Published: 22 February 2007; BMJ 334 doi:10.1136/bmj.39133.531979.DB
See more
- Woman denied abortion in Ireland is offered €30 000 compensationBMJ December 05, 2016, 355 i6530; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6530
- Doctors face manslaughter charge for failing to raise alarm over killer nurseBMJ December 01, 2016, 355 i6507; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6507
- Five thousand dead and counting: the Philippines’ bloody war on drugsBMJ November 28, 2016, 355 i6177; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6177
- Voluntary euthanasia deaths in Quebec outstrip predictions by three to oneBMJ November 23, 2016, 355 i6331; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6331
- The war on drugs has failed: doctors should lead calls for drug policy reformBMJ November 14, 2016, 355 i6067; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6067