KGRKJGETMRETU895U-589TY5MIGM5JGB5SDFESFREWTGR54TY
Server : Apache/2.4.62
System : FreeBSD fbsdweb2.web.rcn.net 14.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 14.1-RELEASE releng/14.1-n267679-10e31f0946d8 GENERIC amd64
User : www ( 80)
PHP Version : 8.3.8
Disable Function : NONE
Directory :  /domains/roger.dnai/97Book/

Upload File :
current_dir [ Writeable ] document_root [ Writeable ]

 

Current File : /domains/roger.dnai/97Book/HOEPER.HTM
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//SoftQuad//DTD HoTMetaL PRO 4.0::19971010::extensions to HTML 4.0//EN"
 "hmpro4.dtd">

<HTML>
  
  <HEAD>
    <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
    <META NAME="GENERATOR" 
    CONTENT="Mozilla/4.03 (Macintosh; U; 68K) [Netscape]">
    <TITLE>Paul J. Hoeper</TITLE>
  </HEAD>
  
  <BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" BGPROPERTIES="FIXED">
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+3">U.S.
    Perspectives on Transatlantic</FONT></FONT></FONT></CENTER>
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+3">Armaments
    Cooperation</FONT></FONT></FONT></CENTER>
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+2">United
    States Deputy Under Secretary of Defense Paul J. Hoeper</FONT></FONT></FONT></CENTER>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">THE NEW GLOBAL
    DEFENSE NEEDS</FONT></FONT></B></H4> </CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The world order of the
      past half-century, which we called the Cold War, led both sides to develop
      superb defense industries--industries with remarkable capabilities and
      vast capacities. To the relief of all, that balance of terror has ended.
      But the capacity of global defense industries is now out of balance with
      the budgets for perceived defense needs.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Two economic consequences
      occur when capacity exceeds demand: lower prices and lower profits. If
      excess capacity continues, companies generally take one of two courses:
      they lay off workers in an attempt to restore profits by lowering costs;
      or they lower prices in an attempt to stimulate demand from countries that
      were not previously customers. Companies that take the second route hope
      to expand their market share enough to restore profit levels. The present
      excess capacity in the global defense-industrial base is putting
      governments squarely between the domestic political evil of unemployment
      and the foreign policy evil of proliferation.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">RESTRUCTURING IN THE
    U.S. DEFENSE INDUSTRY</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Four years ago, the U.S.
      Department of Defense recognized that the U.S. domestic armaments capacity
      exceeded its demand. Then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Bill Perry got in
      touch with a dozen defense industry chief executive officers and invited
      them to dinner at the Pentagon. Dr. Perry told these executives that there
      were twice as many of them in the room as he expected to see in five
      years, and that the U.S. government was prepared to stand by and watch
      defense companies go out of business. This dinner is known around the
      Pentagon as the &quot;Last Supper.&quot;</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">If the mergers being
      considered between Boeing and McDonnell Douglas and Hughes and Raytheon go
      through, 15 of America's top defense companies will have become four:
      Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman. These companies
      have not simply merged, they have restructured by closing excess
      facilities and by cutting their work forces.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The 20 or so mergers in
      the U.S. aerospace and electronics sector during the 1990s have cut 1.8
      million jobs from the defense sector. Fortunately, our economy has been
      robust enough to absorb this job loss. In fact, the United States has
      created more jobs than it lost during the present decade and our
      unemployment stands near a post-World War II low.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">But I do not want to
      minimize the pain that some workers have felt. The average skilled
      assembly worker who is laid off often needs a year to find a new job that
      pays an average of $19,000 per year less than he or she received before.
      Our government--and our aerospace companies--care about these workers.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">But America's defense
      industry has had to restructure out of necessity. Our defense budget has
      fallen dramatically since 1985--both in real terms and as a percentage of
      GDP. As a percentage of GDP, it is now about 3%. This is the lowest
      percentage in half a century. And while present world conditions prevail,
      the defense budget is not likely to grow; at best, it may continue at
      about 3% of GDP. Because the security interests of the United States
      cannot be properly maintained if the American people have to pay the costs
      of excess capacity, we have had to stand by and watch companies leave the
      defense sector. We simply cannot stay strong militarily and economically
      by paying more for less.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">RESTRUCTURING IN THE
    EUROPEAN DEFENSE INDUSTRY</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Excess capacity in the
      global arms industry, declining defense budgets, and the rapid
      restructuring of the U.S. industry have caused Europe, through initiatives
      proposed by France, to look at ways it too can deal with the changes that
      have taken place in the defense sector during the last decade. Along with
      downsizing and privatization initiatives, Europeans have formed
      organizations to manage cooperative ventures among different countries.
      The ultimate goal of combining their resources is to become more
      competitive and focus resources more sharply.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The Development of
    Organizations to Manage Cooperative Ventures</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">National Armaments
      Directors, meeting as the Western European Armaments Group, formed a
      management organization, the Western European Armaments Agency (WEAO), as
      a subordinate body of WEU. Its goal is to eventually create a European
      armaments agency. WEAO will start by coordinating member participation in
      some 40 ongoing armaments research and development projects and by
      assuming responsibility for new cooperative projects.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">France, Germany, Italy,
      and the UK have created another organization, the Organization for Joint
      Cooperation in Armaments (JACO, also known by the French acronym OCCAR).
      This agency is a follow-on to the French-German Armaments Agency proposed
      two years ago. JACO's purpose is to increase efficiency and reduce the
      costs of developing and producing weapons systems for its members; it
      eventually plans to manage cooperative weapons programs for national
      procurement agencies. JACO programs will be run by integrated teams and a
      single director who will be given the requisite authority to impose
      decisions on national partners.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">WEAO and JACO are two
      examples of the integration process Europe is following in order to more
      closely coordinate national armaments programs that in turn will allow its
      armaments industry to remain competitive in the world market. If the
      Europeans can work out their differences, the long-term result should help
      lead to a healthy defense industry that is a much more viable competitor
      and partner for U.S. industries in the worldwide armaments market. To the
      same end, efforts are continuing to consolidate and rationalize the
      European defense industries--efforts that must take place both within and
      across national boundaries.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The Need to Go beyond
    European-wide Cooperation</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">I have two cautions
      regarding this work. First, it is not enough to privatize companies nor to
      merge them; neither privatizing nor merging automatically eliminates
      excess capacity. Painful choices about closing excess facilities and
      rationalizing labor forces must be made. Second, if the formation of WEAO
      and JACO is accompanied by the imposition of national preference rules,
      then we are headed in an extremely unproductive direction.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">There is also a need to
      advance industrial cooperation with the nations of the former Warsaw Pact,
      a step that is now becoming a reality. The Western defense industry has
      started to invest capital and technology in the Central and Eastern
      European production capacity because it sees the potential residing in the
      region's talented and educated work forces.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">&nbsp;</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
    <CENTER><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">DEVELOPING
    INDUSTRIAL PARTNERSHIPS WITH NATO MEMBERS</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
    <CENTER><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">AND FORMER WARSAW
    PACT COUNTRIES</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">On the government side,
      the strengthening of our political relationships with the former Warsaw
      Pact nations over the past seven years has resulted in new opportunities
      for all concerned. Industrial partnerships are now forming. We are working
      hard to improve not only military but also industrial interoperability. In
      the U.S. we are moving to adopt the use of international commercial
      standards for our own defense procurements, part of a trend away from
      unique military standards that will help industries adapt to producing
      NATO-compatible equipment. We are releasing hundreds of standards that
      provide the information necessary for manufacturing NATO-standard
      equipment. We have also invited NATO partners to join the CALS effort so
      that they can move toward a common and single-use defense armaments data
      system. And we have opened to full participation by NATO Partner nations
      several NATO committees that deal with the infrastructure supporting
      defense acquisition, codification, quality assurance, contracting, and
      material standards.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">As part of this effort,
      however, the governments of Central Europe must do their share. First and
      foremost, they must create business climates that promote private
      investment. Here in the Czech Republic, the government is doing exactly
      that, as evidenced by the willingness of the Western defense industry to
      invest in the Czech Republic's only airframe manufacturer, Aero Vodochody.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">In addition, Central
      European nations must put in place a defense procurement system that is
      open and transparent: a system in which competitors can feel comfortable
      that if they submit the most cost-effective proposal, they will win any
      competition. A procurement system that does not measure up to this
      standard, that does not give companies the confidence that their proposals
      will be considered on their merits, will not attract first-rate
      competition.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">AVOIDING A &quot;PRISONER'S
    DILEMMA&quot; SITUATION</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">If we fail to reduce the
      world's excess capacity for defense articles, or if we wind up with a U.S.
      market that is closed to European defense articles and a European market
      that is closed to U.S. defense articles, we could find ourselves in an
      economic &quot;prisoner's dilemma&quot;--where rational individuals defect
      to a position that is irrational for the community as a whole--which could
      encourage weapons proliferation. For example, a company official might
      say, &quot;I would never sell this weapons technology to Country X. Except
      that I know Y will. So, since Country X is going to get the capability
      anyway, I may as well get the sale ...&quot; All competitors might think
      this way, and Country X would wind up with the capability in question,
      even though it might be harmful to the security posture in the region. In
      fact, the sale might even be made at an unprofitable price for the selling
      industry. While I am not suggesting that all companies and governments
      would succumb to the &quot;prisoner's dilemma,&quot; powerful economic
      forces would lead them in this direction.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">What can be done to avoid
      this situation? The only reliable solution is cooperation in the defense
      armaments field. So how must we proceed? First, as our panel of defense
      ministers has suggested, nations should begin the armaments cooperation
      process early--initiating discussions on common military needs before
      formal requirements are locked in. Plans for armaments cooperation should
      begin before any country has identified a specific company to perform the
      work.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Second, we should plan to
      buy systems in a competitive environment. We should buy from competing
      teams that include industrial participants from each partner country, and
      not force one nation's industry to compete against another's. In this way
      we can realize the benefits of competition without creating the political
      unease that results from competitions in which some participants might not
      receive an equitable work share. We can encourage competition between
      companies instead of between parliaments.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The U.S. and our European
      partners are using this model of competition in the Medium Extended Air
      Defense System (MEADS). We hope to do the same in the production phase of
      the Multifunctional Information Distribution System (MIDS) program. We
      would also like to use competing teams throughout the production phase of
      any cooperative program, using a 'leader-follower&quot; scheme. By
      creating a true partnership among the nations acquiring a system, we would
      be able to produce and obtain interoperable equipment that incorporates
      the cooperating nations' best technologies and capabilities in a way that
      maximizes economic value and minimizes the threat of proliferation.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">THE NEED FOR
    TRANSATLANTIC COOPERATION</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The end of the Cold War
      should not--and need not--signal the beginning of a trade war in defense
      armaments. With cooperation we should be able to secure the benefits of
      military interoperability as well as the benefits of the world's best
      technologies. But these benefits can be achieved only if cooperation is
      transatlantic. We in the United States believe that this cooperative
      approach is the optimum way for all NATO members to meet the needs of our
      forces in the 21st century. We have already set our course this way, and,
      judging by the favorable reaction in a recent edition of <I>The Economist</I>,
      we are headed in the right direction. With your help we will continue down
      this road to a new era in defense armaments cooperation.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="HOEPER.HTM">Go
        to top of Page</A></FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="workshop97.htm">Return
        to Prague '97</A></FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="../index.html">Return
        to Home Page</A></FONT></FONT> </P>
  </BODY>
</HTML>

Anon7 - 2021