Printer Friendly

Bush team reviewing defense trade policy. (Government Policy Notes).

The Bush administration in 2002 began a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of U.S. defense trade policies in an effort to identify changes needed to protect the country's national-security and foreign-policy interests.

This assessment, National Security Policy Directive 19--a classified presidential order directing the review--is scheduled to be finished in May.

The review's objectives, according to an unclassified public announcement released late last year by the White House, ate to ensure that defense trade, technology security and acquisitions policies:

* Support the security of the United States.

* Contribute to peace and stability, including regional security.

* Support U.S. nonproliferation and counter-terrorism policies and strategies and international commitments.

* Control critical military technologies.

* Protect such technologies from diversion.

This is not the first attempt to revise U.S. export-control regimes. More than a decade ago, the previous Bush administration initiated a review of the U.S. Munitions List, which was completed during the Clinton administration. At best, this review resulted in token, minor reductions in the list.

In 2000, the United States announced the Defense Trade Security Initiative, which was the first major post-Cold War attempt to revise the U.S. export-control system. This system is a series of safeguards designed to prevent the inappropriate export of sensitive military technology by requiring a license for the export of certain munitions and defense services. The Departments of Defense and State are responsible for determining what can and cannot be exported.

Although welcomed by industry and supported by the Pentagon, the expected efficiencies from DTSI have not materialized. It is widely believed that the reason DTSI has not worked is because it made only procedural modifications to an already complex export system, as opposed to what is really needed to break with the old Cold War thinking-a complete paradigm revision.

Unlike the DTSI, the NSPD-19 is a complete review of export procedures. It will encompass all aspects of the U.S. defense trade and identify foreign market access barriers that impede U.S.-Allied defense industrial cooperation.

The review aims to maintain America's industrial, technological and war-fighting advantages over its potential adversaries, while suggesting methods to facilitate friends' and allies' efforts to increase capability and interoperability for more effective coalitions.

For instance, discussions will include the top U.S. weapons-acquisition programs, for which increased industrial participation or greater access to U.S. technology by allies--and vice versa--would improve military effectiveness of U.S. coalitions. Also included are ways to facilitate fundamental research, exploitation of commercial developments, increase allied defense spending and burden sharing. The review is meant to determine the effectiveness of current policies and procedures such as DTSI and develop recommendations for continuing, changing or discontinuing the initiative, as well as consider additional initiatives as appropriate. However, all proposed modifications will be assessed against the potential risks to U.S. national security and foreign policy interests.

The Departments of Commerce, Defense, State and other federal agencies have been tasked with conducting the review. Several defense-related agencies are soliciting the U.S. defense industry for comments. Working through organizations such as NDIA, Defense Trade Advisory Group, Aerospace Industries Association and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, industry has met to discuss all aspects of defense trade issues, from foreign military financing to export controls. The result has been constructive recommendations on possible improvements in the programs, as well as legislative proposals to implement change.

NDIA strongly supports the NSPD-19 review. Today's defense trade policies and regulations do not reflect current realities-on the one hand, the cooperation and collaboration required for the U.S. defense industry to supply best value for U.S. programs and, on the other, the growing effect of the globalization of the defense market.

From an industry perspective, the current U.S. defense trade regulations are complex and restrictive, seriously inhibiting cooperation with this nation's closest allies. Moreover, industry believes the current export-control system, on balance, may do more unintended damage to U.S. national security polity than it does good.

Major weapons-systems acquisition programs, such as the Joint Strike Fighter-a centerpiece of the current administration's transatlantic cooperative efforts-are predicated on increased U.S. and foreign industrial collaboration, requiring greater technology exchanges. The definition of "U.S. industry" has changed through foreign and U.S. acquisitions and mergers of U.S. defense companies, such as BAE SYSTEMS, and joint ventures, such as Raytheon/Thales.

Current defense trade laws and policies must be revised to balance rational national security concerns and strategies with the need to enhance both the international competitiveness of the U.S. defense industry and the military effectiveness of U.S.-led international coalitions. The NSPD-19 review can be the catalyst to identification of the foreign market access barriers that impede U.S.-allied bilateral defense-industrial cooperation.

NDIA's International Division is working with other associations to ensure that the U.S. defense industry participates in this process. In the next issue of National Defense, we will offer some specific suggestions for the next step in the NSPD-19 Review.

NDIA Government Policy

Peter M. Steffes

Vice President, Government Policy

Ruth W. Franklin

Director, Procurement

Ben Stone

Director, International

Jim Linden

Analyst, Government Policy

Amber Johnson

Staff Assistant

Dennis Kennelly is vice chairman of NDIA's International Division and senior manager of the Washington. D.C., office for MBDA, Inc. Candace Miller, director of International Trade Compliance of BAE Systems and a board member of ND IA International Division, also contributed to this article. For further information on topics related to NDIA Government Policy, please visit our online resource library at
COPYRIGHT 2003 National Defense Industrial Association
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2003, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Stone, Ben
Publication:National Defense
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Apr 1, 2003
Previous Article:U.S., U.K. vow stronger industrial cooperation: trade reform, outsourcing efforts could lead to growing business opportunities.
Next Article:Government. (Brass Tracks).

Related Articles
NDIA Survey Chooses Top Issues for 2001.
Bush's Wilsonian internationalism: how radical is President Bush's globalist agenda? Establishment pundits approvingly compare him to President...
Armitage announces overhaul of export control process. (Washington Pulse).
Security cooperation in a post September 11, 2001 world.
U.S., U.K. vow stronger industrial cooperation: trade reform, outsourcing efforts could lead to growing business opportunities.
Industry suggests improvements for exports. (Government Policy Notes).
Status of U.S. interagency review of U.S. export licensing and technology transfer policy.
Problems with current U.S. policy.
Defense trade policy.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters