Is the U.S. and Britan Defense pact a ‘Good Thing’? // August 3rd, 2009
On the ‘face of it’ this sounds like a very good thing’. Any anticipated problems/issues?
US, Britain sign defence trade treaty 12 minutes ago
LONDON (AFP) - President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair have signed a treaty allowing Britain to buy defence products from the United States without individual export licences, Blair’s office and the White House said Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Defence Trade Cooperation Treaty will address what was reportedly a significant disagreement between the two allies by making it easier to export equipment bought by Britain.
The two sides hope to finalise implementation of the new arrangements by the end of the year, Downing Street said.
“They have agreed to improve transatlantic defence information sharing by reducing the barriers to exchange of defence goods, services and information between the US and UK,” a statement from Blair’s office added.
The White House later released a similarly worded joint statement.
“By removing barriers to communication and collaboration between, and among, our armed forces and our defense industries, we will provide our forces with the most effective means possible to counter these threats,” it said.
Blair himself said he was “delighted” with the agreement.
“Achieving this agreement has become more important than ever before,” he said in a statement on the Downing Street website.
“At a time when British and American forces continue to work closely in defence and security operations around the world, both governments believe we must continue enhancing our ability to cooperate together.”
Britain is Washington’s main ally in Iraq and is also fighting alongside the US as part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.
Last year, the United States reportedly approved 8,500 British-related export licences for defence products.
The agreement is also likely to lead to faster sharing of classified information and simplify technology-sharing arrangements.
It comes amid a rumbling row over the British government’s highly controversial decision to halt an investigation into a slush fund allegedly set up by arms firm BAE Systems to support 1980s arms deals with Saudi Arabia.
August 5th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Nice cut and paste there, might have been less obvious if the line “ADVERTISEMENT” wasn’t in there.
As for the agreement, then for some stuff, then why not.
Most if not all Apache, Chinook and Hercules spares come from America. A little US made equipment is used by us, so being able to get it as and when we need it makes sense.
But it remains a fact that the majority of UK forces are equipped from UK sources (one of the main reasons that out of all the nations in the world, only the UK, and Mozambique forces are equipped with the SA80, and when we came round to fix the problems with it, we spent £475 per rifle, but could have bought M16’s new off the shelf for less), so I think very little will be seen to change for the lads on the ground.
Its just a way of making trade simpler.
August 7th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
It’s cheaper to buy things directly off of another country.