| ARMS
TRADE RESOURCE CENTER
CURRENT
UPDATES: July 11, 2005
In this update:
I. London: Bombs and Brutality
II. Paris Air Show: OUI OUI - What a Difference 2 Years Make
III. SPEAKING OF THE COMING WAR WITH IRAN
I. LONDON: Bombs and Brutality
The July 7th coordinated bombings in London underscored again the horror and inhumanity of terrorism. Our hearts go out to the victims, their families, and the people of London and the UK. As of this writing and least 50 people had died and 700 were wounded as a result of the attacks, making this the deadliest terror attack in British history.
The attacks underscored the vulnerability of urban transit systems, and the lack of adequate plans or funding designed to make it harder for such attacks to be carried out. A recent task force report on a "Unified Security Budget" produced with the leadership of the Center for Defense Information and Foreign Policy in Focus, has proposed a $6 billion increase in transit security, a $4 billion increase for "first responders" (police, fire, and emergency medical personnel), and a $10 billion increase in public health infrastructure that could help prevent future terrorist attacks or at least reduce the loss of life and the number of injuries.
Where will the money come from? By reducing outmoded Cold War weapons systems like the F-22 fighter, the $9-10 billion per year missile defense program, and plans for additional nuclear attack submarines. The full report can be accessed at:
Marcus Corbin, Center for Defense Information and Miriam Pemberton, Foreign Policy in Focus, principal authors
"Report of the Task Force on a Unified Security Budget for the United States, 2006," at www.fpif.org
II. PARIS AIR SHOW: OUI OUI, What a Difference Two Years Make
As we wrote in our June 2003 ATRC Update, the last Paris Air Show was marred by tensions between the Bush administration and European leaders over the war in Iraq. It was the time when the House re-named French Fries "Freedom Fries" in its cafeteria, and the New York Post did a front page article with the heads of the French and German ambassadors replaced by the heads of weasels. In addition that "fair and balanced" pundit Bill O'Reilly was pushing a boycott of French goods. Generals, defense industry CEOs and civilian military leaders stayed home on the orders of Donald Rumsfeld. U.S. companies still had a presence, but it lacked the "sizzle" normally provided by demonstration flights of U.S. military and civilian aircraft. Even so, Lockheed Martin had 250 personnel present (down from the usual 400) and briefings by Northrop Grumman, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin were well attended.
This year, the war is still front page news, and tensions between the U.S. and Europe remain high. In fact, a trade war between Euro-giant Airbus and our own Boeing is mounting. But the air show restored its dazzle, with One-, Two- and Three-Star Generals rubbing shoulders and admiring hardware with their counterparts from around the world, and the U.S. defense industry springing for elaborate displays and luxurious chalets. They really put the fun back in flakking fighter planes.
The proceedings were so alluring that Republican Senator Jeff Sessions from Alabama dusted off his passport and made his first ever trip to Paris. Alabama's governor came too, staying just one night, but what a night it was!! Braised veal, free flowing champagne, Belgian chocolates, and one of the best views in Paris! The Alabama delegation invited execs from Airbus and their parent company EADS to dine with them at the sumptuous Salon Etoile-Marceau, a neo-classical 19th century mansion. The Huntsville Alabama Airport Authority and their County Commissioners picked up the tab. We don't know how much the dinner set them back, but we can bet it was not cheap. We can also bet that along with wining and dining, Alabama was also wheeling and dealing.
The prize? To be chosen as Airbus' site for a $500 million manufacturing plant, with the promise of 1,000 new jobs. South Carolina, Mississippi and Florida were also in the running. The site will build refueling tankers for the United States Air Force, if they get the contract; a contract that was Boeing's until scandal and backroom dealing tarred their name. We've written about the Boeing scandal in the ATRC Update before, but here is the re-cap. Air Force officials and Boeing Executives worked out a deal where the Air Force would lease refueling tanker planes it did not quite need for more than it would cost to buy them outright. Then Boeing hired Darleen Druyun, the Air Force official who inked the deal as a Senior Executive when she retired from the Pentagon. It was later learned that Druyun had already been negotiating for a job with Boeing while she was still negotiating the lease deal with them on behalf of the Pentagon. A lot of big no-nos in there. Darleen Druyun, the former Air Force acquisition executive, is two-thirds of the way through a federal prison sentence in Marianna, Florida. Boeing CFO Michael Sears was sentenced to four months in jail in February, and Boeing's good name is in tatters.
At Boeing's vulnerable moment, rival Airbus is getting aggressive, and Alabama is now part of the plan. Airbus did not choose Alabama just because it threw them a good party at the Eiffel Tower, or offered the biggest tax breaks, although that was real nice. The deciding factor in Airbus' decision was Alabama's political muscle.
At the end of the day, says EADS' North American CEO, Ralph Crosby, "We weren't going to go with a state that didn't have someone on Appropriations or Armed Forces [committees]."
And Alabama has both. Republican Richard Shelby is long-time Senator with all the right appointments and close ties to President Bush. Shelby serves on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and is the Chairman of the Commerce, Justice, and Science Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee. Alabama's junior Senator (and new fan of all things Parisian) Republican Jeff Sessions is a member of the Armed Services Committee.
As Seattle Times writer Alicia Mundy asked last week "What could be more tempting to Airbus and its parent company, EADS, than two powerful Republican Southern politicians as allies in the battle with Boeing for a new Air Force tanker contract?"
And they are getting right to work. Senator Shelby promises that, "We're gonna push every way we can" to get the Pentagon take up the tanker contract again.
MORE DRAMA ON THE SIENE
Boeing and Airbus were not the only companies at the Pairs Air show, but most of the ink was spilled over them.
First, there is the trade dispute. With Boeing officials crying foul over the European Union's underwriting of Airbus with "launch aid." Airbus fired back saying that Boeing receives federal and state incentives and tax breaks. And then Boeing said any company could get those subsidies. And so it went- and continues to go- back and forth. The World Trade Organization may be forced to untie this knot.
Meanwhile, both companies set out to prove their dominance in the world market, releasing tallies of how many planes they sold. Airbus seemed to come out on top, with 280 planes sold for $33.5 billion, over Boeing's 146 planes for $15 billion. But both companies appear to have said too much too soon. Boeing's loudly announced deal with Air Canada lasted as long as the Air Show, before Canadian unions rejected it. Airbus announced Qatar's order of 60 A350 planes, even though the planes aren't launched yet.
The Paris Air Show is certainly more interesting when America comes in force.
READ
"Think Locally, Flirt Globally," by Leslie Wayne, The New York Times, June 17, 2005
www.eclipseaviation.com
ATRC ANALYSIS FROM THE LAST PARIS AIR SHOW
Paris Air Show - Bombs and Bucks, More than Burgundy and Brie: At Stake for Weapons Makers at Paris Air Show
By Frida Berrigan, June 12, 2003, www.worldpolicy.org
Ugly Americans in Paris
By William D. Hartung and Michelle Ciarrocca, The Nation (web only), July 24, 2003, www.thenation.com
The Paris Air Show: The Show Will Go On
By Michelle Ciarrocca, June 12, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
III. COLOMBIA UPDATE: The Same Old Sad Story
As has been the case for decades, the drug war in Colombia has done little to stem the flow of drugs into the U.S. and much to fuel violence and human rights abuses in Colombia.
Testifying before Congress last month, Drug Czar John Walters noted that in 2004 cocaine production in Colombia fell 11%, and overall has declined by 29% since 2001 in the Andean region. Yet a UN report calls the administration's findings into question. While concurring with the 2004 figure in Colombia, the UN report said cocaine production soared by 23% in Peru and 35% in Bolivia. Overall it says coca cultivation in the region increased 2%. Walters maintains that drug crop eradication and drug interdictions are cutting into the profits of Colombia's right-wing paramilitaries and leftist rebels.
American and Colombian officials say they have eradicated a record-breaking million acres of coca plants, yet still Colombian traffickers provide 90% of the cocaine used in the U.S. and 50% of the heroin, the same amount they did five years ago. The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy noted in February that "key indicators of domestic cocaine availability show stable or slightly increased availability in drug markets throughout the country," while prices have remained stable and purity has improved. And another U.S. government task force estimated that last year cartels produced more than twice the amount of cocaine claimed by the White House.
This discrepancy over drug numbers and estimates matters. Congress uses the White House figures as a measuring stick when determining the best way to spend nearly $1 billion annually in counternarcotics programs in South America. Last week, the Houston Chronicle reported that two Republican lawmakers have asked the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, to evaluate the Bush administration's anti-drug policies and to double-check its cocaine-production estimates.
"We need the most credible information possible if members are going to continue to support" current drug-enforcement efforts in South America, said David Marin, a spokesman for the House Government Reform Committee. The panel is chaired by Representative Tom Davis of Virginia, who requested the GAO review along with Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley.
According to a study by the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), over the last 25 years, U.S. taxpayers have doled out an estimated $45 billion fighting drugs. Since 2000, the Congressional Research Service tallied State and Defense spending on the Bush administration's drug war at $5.4 billion, with about $4.5 billion going to Colombia alone.
Plan Colombia began under the Clinton administration primarily to fight drugs, and to promote peace and stability and to encourage economic and legal reforms in Colombia. Since September 11, 2001, the Bush administration has emphasized counter-terrorism and regional security, making a rhetoric switch from fighting the "war on drugs" to fighting the "war on narco-terrorism." President Bush made Colombia one of his first state visits after the November 2004 reelection, Washington has freed up more money for President Uribe's war and changed U.S. law to allow the Colombian president to use U.S. military assistance to directly engage the FARC (the leftist revolutionary group).The House has already approved the Bush administration's request for $734.5 million for next year as part of a foreign aid bill, a continuation of Plan Colombia.
Four congressmen sent a letter last month to Representative Jerry Lewis (R-CA) chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, saying it is "in our nation's interest" to provide Colombia with an additional $150 million in funding next year for Plan Colombia. The funds would go for new equipment to set up a drug eradication base, for four AT802 Air Tractor fumigation airplanes, six Huey II and two Black Hawk helicopters among other equipment. The letter was signed by Representaives Henry Hyde (R-Ill), Tom Davis (R-Va), Dan Burton (R-Ind.) and Mark Souder (R-Ind.).
As noted in our Weapons at War report, the Colombian military and police are collectively responsible for the most human rights violations in the Western Hemisphere. A report from the Congressional Research Service found there has been measurable progress in Colombia's internal security, as indicated by decreases in violence, but went on to note that Colombia was no closer to ending the decades long conflict and human rights abuses persist.
According to the State Department's 2004 Human Rights Report, "some members of the security forces continued to commit serious abuses, including unlawful and extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances. Some members of the security forces continued to collaborate with the terrorist AUC [paramilitary group], which committed serious abuses." Domestically, Uribe defines any opposition, including criticism from human rights groups, as terrorism, and has used the rhetoric of the war on terrorism and concerns about security to enact legislation curtailing citizens rights.
With the Colombian Congress recently passing a law governing the disarmament of the country's death squads, U.S. aid to Colombia could be in jeopardy. The law would permit the demobilization of up to 20,000 fighters and paramilitary commanders. But critics note that at the same time it will shield them from serious punishment or extradition on drug charges to the U.S. One Colombian legislator said, "This is a law that brings no justice, no peace. It should be called what it really is a law of impunity and immunity."
While the bill has the backing of the Bush administration and Ambassador to Colombia William Wood, lawmakers in Washington are ready to put up a fight. They are threatening to block the Uribe government from recieving the funds it needs to put the law into effect.
The New York Times reported that the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee was incensed that Colombia had approved a law its members see as highly beneficial for paramilitary commanders. U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy said, "We want to see the armed groups demobilize, but this law rewards some of Colombia's worst terrorists and drug traffickers without any assurance that their criminal organizations will be dismantled."
RESOURCES
U.S. Weapons at War 2005: Promoting Freedom or Fueling Conflict?, a World Policy Institute Special Report, by Frida Berrigan and William D. Hartung, June 2005. www.worldpolicy.org
National Taxpayers Union - Plan Colombia's Problems Symptomatic of Ailing U.S. Foreign Aid Policy, Says Nation's Largest Taxpayer Group, June 23, 2005, www.ntu.org
The Center for International Policy - Colombia Program, www.ciponline.org
The Washington Office on Latin America, www.wola.org
Reports
| Recent News Coverage
| Updates
|
