From: 
Subject: [ttssuf] U.S. Arms Sales not Affected by Global Slowdown

 

  

http://thefastertimes.com/defensespending/2009/11/09/us-arms-sales-not-affec
ted-by-global-slowdown/

 


U.S.
<http://thefastertimes.com/defensespending/2009/11/09/us-arms-sales-not-affe
cted-by-global-slowdown/>  Arms Sales not Affected by Global Slowdown


 

November 9, 2009 Daniel Darling
<http://thefastertimes.com/about/?u=danieldarling>  

In its annual <http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/R40796.pdf>  report on
conventional arms transfers released in September, the Congressional
Research Service (CRS) took note that the value of global arms sales dipped
by 7.6 percent in 2008 to $55.2 billion. However, in contrast to the
declining overall global arms market, American defense-producers signed new
weapons contracts worth $37.79 billion; this represented an almost 35
percent rise from the previous total attained in 2007. The countries with
the next-largest total of arms agreements were Italy ($3.7 billion),
followed by Russia ($3.5 billion). Of the total arms transfer agreements
signed by the U.S. with other countries $29.6 billion were with what the CRS
categorizes as developing nations.

The chasm between the leading arms-selling nations widened further in 2008
due to the recessionary wave that washed across the globe. The gap became
particularly acute as the U.S. firmly clung to its position as dominant
provider to the Middle East - a region rich in energy revenues coupled with
a penchant for procuring defense articles. The disparity between the three
leading vendors in 2007 shows the degree to which the U.S. separated itself
from the rest of the defense providers in 2008. During 2007 the total of
transfer agreements attained by the U.S. ($24.7 billion) was followed by
Russia ($10.5 billion) and the United Kingdom ($9.8 billion), indicating
that while still the leading arms merchant by a healthy margin, the gap
between Washington and its nearest competitors was somewhat less pronounced.

Despite the efforts of Russia, France and the U.K. to increase their arms
sales in order to support domestic defense industries and broaden revenue
streams, the U.S. remains far and away the leading global arms supplier.
>From 2001 through 2008 the U.S. delivered $90.9 billion worth of armaments
to countries across the globe, while the next closest, Russia, provided its
clients with less than half that total at $38.4 billion. Last year the U.S.
delivered $12.23 billion worth of military-related hardware worldwide. That
figure was greater than the next four largest arms exporters - Russia ($5.4
billion), Germany ($2.9 billion), the U.K. ($2 billion) and China ($1.4
billion) - combined.

Though sales of new-build platforms often get the most attention, it is the
required support for those systems once they are in service with the buyer
that feeds a continuous profit-making enterprise for the delivering nation.
After the purchasing party begins utilization of a new batch of jet
fighters, armored vehicles, naval frigates, etc, these defense items often
can remain in service for 30 years, making provision of maintenance, spare
parts and upgrades a necessity. Modern weapons systems - particularly combat
aircraft and warships - are designed and produced with complex technologies
requiring constant upgrades. After-sales support, therefore, goes
hand-in-hand with initial purchase.

Because of the constant work-share and continuous revenue inflow stemming
from large arms sales, suppliers are eager to insert their wares into a new
market and maintain their hold. Often the sales pitch will resonate from the
highest echelons of power, as seen in the case of the premature announcement
of the French Rafale combat aircraft in Brazil
<http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/09/11/332109/brazil-continues-fx-
2-competition-backtracks-on-rafale.html> 's fighter competition. That
announcement was made after a personal appeal
<http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=ab9jjDAD5VEY>  by
French President Nicolas Sarkozy to his Brazilian counterpart, Luiz Inacio
da Silva, on behalf of Dassault Aviation.

During the Cold War, the U.S. and former Soviet Union used arms sales to
shore up alliances and cement regional power. Since that time the U.S. has
leaned on arms sales as a means of reassuring strategic partners of American
political support and ensuring interoperability between American and allied
forces. While the U.S. and Western Europe have benefited from the fall of
the Soviet Union - which opened up Eastern Europe to new suppliers, Russia
has been the victim. In order to absorb the loss of its former Warsaw Pact
base, Russia has scrambled to lock down past Soviet clientele such as Syria
<http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2009/09/15/Russia-seeks-
Mideast-arms-sales-boost/UPI-89011253044464/>  and Vietnam
<http://www.cdi.org/russia/272-14.cfm> , while at the same time cultivating
new customers in Venezuela
<http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=4311>  and Iran
<http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/pm_0427.pdf> . It has also leaned
heavily on its key export markets of China and India in order to sustain its
defense industrial base, thus making the push by India to diversify its
source of supply worrisome for Moscow
<http://www.ipcs.org/article_details.php?articleNo=2902&cID=4> .

The U.S., meanwhile, can count on sustained sales from its vast client book
spanning the globe. Its customers not only include the Europeans, but strong
military markets such as Turkey
<http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2009/Turkey_09-44.pdf> , Israel,
Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and Australia. The U.S. also stands to reap
long-term benefits from the major military reclamation project in Iraq,
whose government requested nearly $16 billion worth of arms and services
from the Pentagon during the course of 2008.

Most important for U.S. arms-selling interests during the current period of
economic malaise is the dependence of the oil-rich Middle Eastern nations on
the American supply chain for sale and support of advanced weapon systems.
By locking down the Middle Eastern market the U.S. is able to withstand
periods such as the present one in which a recession causes buyer-nations to
scale back their defense ambitions.

Buffeted by years of healthy energy sales and sovereign wealth funds, the
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations are able to move ahead with purchases
of expensive new platforms, such as the nearly $7
<http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2008/UAE_08-19.pdf>  billion
acquisition by the UAE of the Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD)
system via the Pentagon's government-to-government Foreign Military Sales
(FMS) program. A package of FMS deals
<http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/iran/articles/arms_deal_falls_short
/> worth $20 billion put forth by the former Bush administration in 2007
helps ensure that the GCC countries will remain continual defense customers
of the U.S.

So long as the U.S. has a wide-range of security agreements with other
countries and maintains strategic interests across the globe it will have a
host of dependent clients providing work-share for its domestic defense
industrial base. The latest CRS figures show that U.S. arms transfer
agreements with the world have continued to grow from 2004, expanding by 66
percent through 2008. According to a recent Pentagon announcement
<http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/asmp/externalresources/2009/DSCA_Directors_
Blog_%20Record_High_Foreign_Military_Sales.pdf> , FMS figures through fiscal
year 2009 (ending September 30th) reached a record $37.9 billion - 467
percent more than the low-water mark of $8.1 billion tallied in 1998.

Put simply, an American arms-sale slowdown ensuing from delayed reaction to
the global recession has yet to metastasize. Instead the U.S. remains the
locomotive powering the global arms train and will continue to serve as such
through the foreseeable future.

 

 

 

*** exposing the hidden truth for further educational research only ***
CAVEAT LECTOR *** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and educational
purposes. NOTE: Some links may require cut and paste into your Internet
Browser. Please check for daily real news posts and support the truth!
(sorry but don't have time to email all posts) at
<http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr> http://tinyurl.com/33c9yr    or
<http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2>
http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences/topics?gvc=2  ; You can
also subscribe to the multiple daily emails by sending  an email to
<mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected] ; free book download:
<http://www.lulu.com/content/165077> http://www.lulu.com/content/165077  ***
Revealing the hidden Truth For Educational & Further Research Purposes only.
***  NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security
Agency (NSA) may have read emails without warning, warrant, or notice. They
may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no
recourse, nor protection.......... IF anyone other than the addressee of
this e-mail is reading it, you are in violation of the 1st & 4th Amendments
to the Constitution of the United States. Patriot Act 5 & H.R. 1955
Disclaimer Notice: This post & all my past & future posts represent parody &
satire & are all intended for entertainment and amusement only. To be
removed from the weekly list, please reply with the subject line "REMOVE"

 


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"total_truth_sciences" group.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/total_truth_sciences
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to