+0
India was the leading buyer of conventional arms among developing nations in 2004, a report for the US Congress says.
The Congressional Research Service said Delhi agreed the transfer of $5.7bn in weapons, ahead of China.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4200812.stm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

India bought weapons to the tune of $5.7 billion dollars. Would you write 'agreed the transfer of $5.7 billion in weapons' ?

The word agree has nothing to do with buying. The word agree is a rather a simple one. It doesn't have any esoteric meaning.
+0
Hi Rotter,

Fact #1: The article says India was a leading buyer.

Fact #2: It also says India agreed to this huge transfer of weapons worth almost $6B.

It doesn't explicitly equate these 2 facts. In other words, it doesn't say that India bought these particular weapons. Very often, these international deals are not just simple sales. Perhaps India obtained the weapons by offering the other country a relaxation in futute trade tariffs or in some other way that is not based on cash.

As a grammar note, I would say ...agreed to the transfer ... Agree is an intransitive verb. I've seen this transitive use before, it's becoming a part of business jargon. I think perhaps they mean something like ...approved the transfer ...

Best wishes, Clive

+0
I wonder whether this use of 'agree' is intended to suggest a stronger sense of 'participation'. (You can 'agree to' something in which you have played no or little part.)

MrP