BAE Chief: Lower U.S. Tech Transfer Rules
By WILLIAM MATTHEWS , Defense News, July 11, 2005
The chief of Europe’s largest defense company is urging the U.S. government to ease rules that restrict foreign access to defense U.S. technology.
Dick Olver, chairman of London-based BAE SYSTEMS, said export controls imposed by the State Department are hindering the development of high-tech weapons such as the Joint Strike Fighter and “data fusion” technology that promises to improve battlefield situational awareness.
In addition, “buy American” sentiment in the House of Representatives in recent years threatens to further limit the ability of foreign companies to sell to the U.S. military. Olver called it “misguided.”
If buy American legislation prevails, it “would impair the United States’ defense capabilities because it would prevent the U.S. taking full advantage of the global market,” Olver said in a July 12 address at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a public policy research institute.
BAE has a particular interest in lowering the barriers that inhibit technology transfers and buying from foreign defense suppliers. Since 1999, the company has bought about a dozen U.S. defense firms. In March, BAE paid $4.2 billion to buy United Defense Industries, the maker of Bradley fighting and Marine Corps amphibious vehicles, naval guns, missile launchers and precision munitions.
BAE employs 35,000 American workers and expects to keep expanding in the United States, Olver said.
But even a “trans-Atlantic company” like BAE must get State Department approval before an American branch of the company can share sensitive technology with a British branch.
One result, Olver said, is that the United States has a hard time getting access to expertise it needs on short take-off and vertical landing — a key feature in one version of the JSF.
“We have been asked to lead the testing of this technology and to carry out operational modeling of mixed short takeoff and conventional takeoff options. But we can only do this if we receive the right approvals,” Olver said.
BAE has hit a similar roadblock with data fusion technology. The company has developed ways to combine data from multiple sources to create a detailed picture of a threat, he said. “Combined with U.S. capability, we believe we would be cutting-edge. But we are waiting for approval to contribute what we know in order to develop more capable, interoperable solutions.”
One of the big losers because of U.S. export controls is the United States, Olver said.
Controls deny the United States access to tens of thousands of skilled engineers, scientists, companies and technology, he said.
One aim of U.S. technology transfer restrictions is to deny militarily important technology to U.S. enemies and potential adversaries. But Olver said strict British prohibitions mean “there is no possibility” that critical U.S. technology would be re-exported to prohibited countries such as China.
COMMENT:
Sigh. This is such GARBAGE. We have more, and better skilled aerospace and electronics engineers now selling real estate and insurance for lack of employment BY OUR OWN DEFENSE INDUSTRY!!!!!!
And the "Global Market" is most assuredly not a good reason for furthering this abomination any further. The plane is either built entirely so as to DEFEND AMERICA...or it shouldn't be built.
If it's solely a flying pig farm, for the benefit of our allies, or merely to stymie the french fighter (much as I like to embarass them that's not a good enough reason to spend $220 billion U.S.), then it badly needs termination.
Put the money into the F-22...which is mostly American at least. And a TRUE air superiority machine. It rocks. Restored funding would let Lockheed get the economies of scale needed to really optimize our investment in this plane. The numbers would be there...
