Multinational aircraft program tests transatlantic cooperation.

The Pentagon's international security office is sharpening its focus on the Joint Strike Fighter program, which is viewed as a litmus test for transatlantic cooperation.

Troubles and delays in the JSF program--which has the United Kingdom as a principal partner, and seven other foreign participants--prompted the reorganization of the Pentagon's defense technology and security administration.

The program is intended to produce up to 2,700 aircraft for the U.S. military services and the U.K. Royal Navy.

With JSF, "we had a difficult start to exchanging the necessary data and technical information on this vital program," said Lord William Bach of Lutterworth, U.K. undersecretary of state and minister of state for defense procurement.

"This is not to downplay the commitments of those in the program. It is perhaps inevitable that the mechanisms and processes that facilitate our cooperation sometimes lag behind the agreements between our governments," he said.

Cooperation was reached on the system design and development phase, but the transfer of data and technical information has been way behind, he said.

A senior Pentagon official speaking to a defense industry conference in London said that some of these problems can be blamed on the U.S. bureaucracy. "The vast majority of acquisition PMs [program managers] were not cognizant of export control requirements until they were informed that a certain license application had not been approved, thereby delaying the next step of a critical international armaments cooperation program," said the official.

U.S. companies that sell defense technology to foreign customers must obtain an export license from the State Department. Much of the legwork that leads to the approval of these licenses is done by the defense technology, security administration.

To help smooth the process for JSF, the agency appointed a team of engineers, licensing and policy officers dedicated to review JSF technology licensing.

"In the past, any licensing officers could review any licensing, but this team is designed to be the single point of contact that reviews all licensing related to the JSF," the official said.

The team does more than review licenses. It also assists the JSF program in sorting through International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) considerations and their specific application to JSF. This helps to ensure that all JSF-related licenses are reviewed based on the same standards and "will have consistency of application of our technology security rules," said the official.

Bach said much progress has been achieved in sharing information and data.

The JSF model is also being applied to other international projects. The Pentagon's defense technology security administration assigned a team to missile defense programs. "While we do not have the volume of licensing in missile defense that we have with JSF, we are getting ready now for the licenses that we expect to come about as a result of cooperation," said the official.

That team now is working with the U.S. Missile Defense Agency to identify critical technologies for cooperative programs. Engineers from the team frequently meet with U.S. contractors and have offered to do the same with U.K. firms to better understand their design and production lines.

The licensing process appears to be improving, particularly for U.K. customers. This year, so far, the processing time for all U.K. related licenses was 22 days, compared to 42 a few years ago.

Despite the Pentagon's efforts, frustration is boiling in the United Kingdom--the strongest U.S. military ally--over recent attempts by the U.S. Congress to pass legislations that would restrict the participation of foreign firms in U.S. programs.

"Last year, we had to deal with the implications of the defense authorization bill, which sought to introduce adverse protectionist measures to U.S. procurement," said Bach. "Seems like we just escaped from that damaging proposal only to be confronted with yet another. It has a new name, new wording and a new strategy, but its intentions are just the same."

Controversy is looming over a measure introduced by Duncan Hunter, the head of the House Armed Services Committee, to curtail offset agreements in countries where U.S. defense industry seeks to sell its systems.

Protectionist measures are built upon a fallacy, which has nothing to do with fair trade, Bach added. "We, U.K. and U.S., I passionately believe, both will be losers if such legislation is allowed to pass into law," he said.

Under the U.K. export control act, it will be unlawful for the United Kingdom to transfer technology or provide technical assistance to governments who in any way are suspected of using the technology on weapons of mass destruction, Bach said. "These measures are meant to instill great confidence in our allies that we have the right method in place to protect that information, that which our ally chooses to share with us."

Despite efforts to instill confidence, Bach lamented that United States does not act on its promises.

Case in point are the ITAR waivers on which the two countries agreed last May and the delivery of the waiver is overdue, said Bach. "They say that action speaks louder than words," he said. The delay creates frustration in Great Britain, and the "message it sends is counter-productive."

He added that the House version of the 2005 defense authorization bill also includes language, which will further impede the introduction of an ITAR waiver.