Potential military threat to the US?
Potential partner in trade with the US -- with internal stability?
Potential collapse of the Chinese State?
Is the present US export policy detrimental to our future relations
with China?
Would a more open policy lead to better communications between the US
and China?
Would this lead to reduced tension between China and the US?
Will restricting military and dual use exports delay or prevent the Chinese
military from becoming a threat?
Honest adherents of different economic and political persuasions support
different solutions.
A better understanding of what we can and cant do could lead to
some agreement on how to proceed.
In this regard, a recent Defense Science Board study might be helpful.
The Task Force was composed of a number of knowledgeable individuals
who studied various issues for more than a year and issued a final report in
December 1999.
Some of the findings and recommendations of this Task Force may be of
interest to this Committee.
The phenomenon of accelerated global integration is largely irresistible
and is a fact to which policymakers must adapt.
Globalization is altering fundamentally the composition of DoDs
supporting industrial base.
DoD now is supported by a more commercial intensive industrial base that
is becoming increasingly international in character.
Globalization and the commercial sector are driving development of much
of the advanced technology.
Over time, all friendly and adversarial States will share access to the
majority of the technology underpinning the modern military.
U.S. military-technological advantage will derive less from advanced
component and subsystem technology than from our defense sectors superior
system integrators.
Increasing the US dependence on export controls to maintain the capability
gap between US military forces and those of our competitors will ultimately
increase, not decrease,the likelihood that the gap will narrow.
DoD should attempt to protect for the purpose of maintaining military
advantage only those capabilities and technologies of which the US is the sole
possessor.
With military cook books globally available to construct
weapon systems, the US will face a number of threats.
Russia and China have the capability of developing superior weapon systems.
e.g., Russias doubled hulled titanium submarines
Even poor nations can develop good enough weapon systems.
e.g., North Koreas ballistic missiles
Threats can evolve quickly.
Consider how Germany transformed its military might between 1932 and 1939.
US Export Control policy may play a minimal role in National Security.
The first responsibility of our Government is the Survival of our Nation.
The Federal Government alone has responsibility for National Defense.
Unfortunately, the Defense Sectors capability as a system integrator
is slowly eroding.
Between 1985 and 1999, Defense procurement, in real terms, fell 50 percent--from
approximately $100 billion to $50 billion per year.
FY01 Defense funds are expected to consume 2.9 percent of the GDP, the
lowest level since WWII.
At the height of the Reagan build-up, we spent 6 percent of the GDP on
Defense.
Democracies often have been unwilling to divert sufficient funds to meet
future threats and then have had to pay a horrible price.
While this Administration recognizes the need to restructure our military
force to meet future threats, the super sandboxes of Congress, the Defense Industry,
and the Military make it impossible to do with the present budget.
In addition to export controls and Globalization, over which we have limited
control, we need to focus on policies and resources under our direct and
full control.
This Nation must give Defense a higher priority.