Letting like-minded states have your sophisticated defence technology and seeing them line up with you politically tend to go hand in hand. Not so for the USA. Just as soon as America realised the political and commercial benefits of defence exporting - it can simultaneously offset the costs of developing new equipment, increase the prosperity of manufacturers and get the recipients within government's foreign policy grasp - its exporting machine has gone into reverse. Even worse, it's reliability, both as a defence supplier and partner, is being questioned to the benefit of Europe and, potentially more dangerous, the former eastern bloc.
And US industry is becoming impatient. If the country's export controls are not revised and geared to the needs and realities of today's global marketplace, companies say, the USA will find itself more and more isolated, both politically and industrially.
US aerospace manufacturers feel especially disadvantaged compared with their foreign competitors because US export licensing is so complex and time-consuming that, they say, it can, and does, cost them sales. (The block on the release of radar and electronic warfare software source codes for the Block 60 Lockheed Martin F-16 to the United Arab Emirates because of fears that it might get into the hands of non-aligned or embargoed states such as Pakistan could do just that). And even when they have secured an export licence, they constantly run the risk of seeing the controls subject to arbitrary interference from Congress, which harms their customers. Making matters worse is that the current controls cannot cope with the blurring of distinction between military and commercial technology. These days, the US military is looking to commercial products to reduce its costs and speed up the pace with which it can develop and upgrade weapon systems.
The US Aerospace Industries Association recently lobbied for a revised Export Administration Act with new safeguards. Letting US companies sell products equivalent to those available from other sources was one. If the UAE can have the French Rafale or the Eurofighter Typhoon, then why not the F-16 Block 60? Permitting US companies to be able to honour existing contracts, except where multilateral sanctions enter into force, was also requested. So too was only imposing unilateral US controls as an interim measure with a commitment to terminating the US controls if multilateral controls are not achieved within a given timeframe.
Finally, the AIA is urging Congress to allow contractors to continue support for previously legitimate exports even if new sales to that country are prohibited.
Such changes would at least put a stop to the arbitrariness and hypocrisy of US export control policy. Take the Pakistan F-16 charade, for example. Supplying fighters to Pakistan, a long-time US ally, was seen as a way of maintaining the regional balance of power. But after Pakistan was allowed to order more, delivery was blocked by Congress. This was a unilateral act. It only became multilateral after Pakistan conducted nuclear tests in retaliation for India's own testing. Pakistan is now looking at buying fighters from elsewhere, possibly China.
Another anomaly is Israel's aid for China'sF-10 fighter using technology developed originally by licence-building US equipment, then by using US military aid to pay for development of is own Lavi fighter. Yet Israel is still allowed access to advanced US technology (such as the F-16 Block 50+). So, by comparison with Israel's industrialised and institutionalised transfer of technology, how much information on the F-16 Block 60 could, or would, be transferred by the UAE, or the Pakistani pilots that it may hire to fly them?
It is not that US manufacturers are asking for export controls to be removed but simply for a rational, logical and coherent policy to be drawn up in the USA that the rest of the world can understand and they can work with and be considered reliable, trustworthy partners. If the reality for defence companies worldwide is to export to survive, it is time for the US Congress to recognise the increasingly global dimension of the industry and align its policy, or not as the case may be, with other allied states to promote a level playing field for all with everyone playing to the same rules.
"US manufacturers are simply asking for a rational, logical and coherent US export control policy."
Source: Flight International
