
Perhaps there's more to this than meets the eye, but on the face of it the Obama administration has not only broken a promise made to Britain but reneged upon a vital agreement that would have given the UK full "operational sovereignty" over the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighters we're supposed to be buying for our new aircraft carriers.
Back in December 2006 Lord Drayson, minister for Defence Procurement, travelled to Washington for urgent talks to save Britain's participation in the programme. Crucial to this was the signing of a memorandum of Understanding that would give Britain, the only "Tier 1" partner, full access to software codes that would allow UK personnel to upgrade the JSF as and when needed. Without this "technology transfer" the UK would be dependent upon the US for maintaining the aircraft and, consequently, would not actually have "operational sovereignty" despite committing billions to the development of the plane. This was, Drayson, insisted, "non-negotiable" and it was a matter raised repeatedly by Tony Blair in his regular discussions with George W Bush.
The American objection to these "technology transfers" is, essentially, that they don't trust the British not to sell or leak the codes to someone else. So much for that much-vaunted Special Relationship, eh? But Bush, to his credit, faced down opposition from his own party in Congress (most notably from the egregiously awful Henry Hyde) and gave Britain the assurances it sought.
That was then, however, and this is now. Obama appears to have reneged on the deal. According to Reuters:
The United States will keep to itself sensitive software code that controls Lockheed Martin Corp's new radar-evading F-35 fighter jet despite requests from partner countries, a senior Pentagon program official said.
Access to the technology had been publicly sought by Britain, which had threatened to scrub plans to buy as many as 138 F-35s if it were unable to maintain and upgrade its fleet without U.S. involvement.
No other country is getting the so-called source code, the key to the plane's electronic brains, Jon Schreiber, who heads the program's international affairs, told Reuters in an interview Monday.
"That includes everybody," he said, acknowledging this was not overly popular among the eight that have co-financed F-35 development -- Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Canada, Australia, Denmark and Norway.
Instead, apparently, there will a "reprogramming facility" in Florida where the US will hand out and monitor upgrades. This is not what we were promised, not what we signed on for and not, frankly, what we paid for.
So what next? Do we remain committed to the JSF despite this slap in the face? Or do we switch to Dassault's Rafale or even, god help us, some re-engineered, adapted Typhoon? It seems improbable that we will but given that British support for American foreign policy has ended one Prime Ministerial career and helped wound another you might think it time to ask what's really in it for us? Or are "non-negotiable" matters of operational sovereignty actually all-too-negotiable after all?
This is one area in which, at matters seem to stand, Barack Obama is worse than George W Bush.
Filed under: Britain (679 more articles) , Bush (53 more articles) , Defence (343 more articles) , Obama (355 more articles) , Special Relationship (42 more articles)
Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (26)
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
1 Ignore the European Court and deport Abu Qatada tonight - Douglas Murray
2 The danger for the Lib Dems - James Forsyth
3 We must be honest about honour killings - William Maxwell
Andrew Sullivan
Ben Smith
Charles Crawford
Chris Dillow
Claudia Massie
Dan Drezner
Daniel Larison
Dave Weigel
Ezra Klein
French Politics
Global Guerrilas (John Robb)
Henry Porter
James Fallows
Julian Sanchez
Kerry Howley
Kevin Drum
League of Ordinary Gentlemen
Marc Ambinder
Matt Zeitlin
Matthew Yglesias
Megan McArdle
More than Mind Games
Mr Eugenides
Norm Geras
Our Kingdom
Outside the Beltway
Radley Balko
Reason: Hit&Run
Rod Dreher
Samizdata
Scottish Unionist
SNP Tactical Voting
The American Scene
The Plank
Tim Worstall
Toby Harnden
Will Wilkinson
Charlotte Gore
Iain Martin
Hopi Sen
Liberal Vision
Left Back in the Changing Room
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
ndm
November 25th, 2009 6:28pm Report this commentI hope the legions of British Prime Ministers, and Euro-sceptics, who fawn over the special relationship will view this as a wake-up call. I remember a while back reading some anti-nuclear campaigner questining whether Britain had full control over its nuclear weapons and asking if Britain could target Washington DC.
T Oofpah
November 25th, 2009 6:40pm Report this commentWhy is anyone surprised. They let Lehmans go under knowing the damage that would cause worldwide. There never has been a Special Relationship (remember Suez) and there never will be.
USA does what it does to benefit the USA and the USA only. We might get the odd crumb but that's aall.
To survive, this sinking ship, the SS Great Britain needs to wise up and stop believing fairy stories
Michael Booth
November 25th, 2009 6:56pm Report this commentand whilst we are on the subject of the special relationship, what about the ubiquitous extradition arrangements Blair signed up for? Time to say no to that, I think.
Beefeater
November 25th, 2009 7:08pm Report this commentOperational sovereignty will go the way of sovereignty.
What does Britain want these fighter jets for? To help America? Has there been any independent, self-initiated British action since the Falklands?
In any case, Obama's foreign policy will soon take away the war option entirely. Once he has marched his troops to Afghanistan and marched them back again, the army will be be a jobs-training and benefits adjunct to Health and Human Services.
If Britain were to get the jets, they would simply cruise around on aircraft carriers, dodging pirates.
There is no point in a special relationship between two nations both of which are in the process of dismantling their sovereignty.
HairyNoddy
November 25th, 2009 7:43pm Report this commentCan't really blame the yanks though.
Firstly this government is known losing sensitive information,
Secondly, thanks to wave after wave of muslim immigration and Mrs Jack Dromey's policy of positive discrimination for ethnic minorities; the companies which have access to this sensitive information will be forced to employ people who are actively hostile to British interests.
Nice job commie scum.
Stephen Rothbart
November 25th, 2009 9:06pm Report this commentI agree with HairyNoddy except for his choice of username! Britain has become a security risk, but I think the US Military has also become a security risk, and for two reasons.
The first is the 'in denial' reaction of the Hasan attack on Fort Hood last week, in which the White House and the security agencies tied themselves in knots to try to avoid any Islamic militant connections, and the second is that under Obama, the White House is beginning to court some very dangerous 'friends' and who knows where this courtship will end?
Obama has turned his back on South Korea, India, Taiwan, Tibet and Japan while he courts China, and on moderate Islamic states and Israel while he courts Syria and Iran.
He also turned his back on Honduras while he tried to side with Chavez and his Leftish totalitarian allies in South America.
As for the 'special relationship' it has always been there because largely speaking, the UK and the USA shared the same values of freedom and democracy against brutal oppression, so both countries were thrown together in several conflicts that arose.
But while, as a Brit, I resent that the US made us pay for their support during WW2, I respect their right to look after their own interests first and last, as I would expect our leaders to do for us.
Sadly, our last leaders have put only themselves above the interests of the country and the people that elected them, which is why we have ended up with a Belgian puppet President and a pygmy Foreign Secretary who can be safely manipulated by the French and German leaders who put them in power in the first place.
Britain needs a leader to give us back our commonsense in matters of political correctness and sovereignty.
We may have to wait a long time for that to happen, but in the meantime I think both the military and their leaders on both sides of the pond will be wary of each other, and rightly so.
Occam's Tool
November 25th, 2009 9:35pm Report this commentAs Gomer Pyle might say, "surprise, surprise, surprise." Thanks to all you Euroweenies for supporting this idiot over a principled senior statesman like John McCain.
Steve
November 25th, 2009 11:42pm Report this commentgoogling "obama breaks promise" - with the quotes - returns 651,000 hits
Andrew Cadman
November 26th, 2009 12:44am Report this commentThere is no special relationship and there never has been.
Its just the emotional crutch of psychological inadequates who cant stand the fact that our time in the sun has passed.
Even the vast majority of right -wingers don't believe in this nonsense anymore, if the responses on ConservativeHome on this question are anything to go by.
I would add that Europhilia is the reverse sign of the same psychological coin - a desperation for our elite to remain at the top table no matter what the costs to the country as a whole.
The British elite is made up of small men, trying desperately hard to be big men. Its a pathetic sight.
Patricia Shaw
November 26th, 2009 12:46am Report this commentSo if America doesn't rate us as partner, China and India don't either, might that leave Europe?
Or are the Spectator's Elders advocating we form a trade union with Israel ?
Patricia Shaw
November 26th, 2009 12:48am Report this commentOccam's Tool = (I wonder if Occam misses you on his trips to the bathroom?)
Why don't you go back to torturing sad little men in orange jump suits? Lots of love from a Euroweenie
Beafeater
November 26th, 2009 7:18am Report this commentPatricia Shaw:
"Or are the Spectator's Elders advocating we form a trade union with Israel?"
I think you meant this to be cutting. Your usage of "Elders" makes it thoroughly nasty. Trade with Israel is not a Protocol.
Shame on you.
You are Euroweenier than you imagine.
Austin Barry
November 26th, 2009 7:44am Report this commentGod knows why the Yanks should have security concerns with a country which funds terrorist schools, welcomes the Islamist diaspora and is run by a spineless, attenuated, self-hating elite of crooks and Euroweenies who spawned Philby, Blunt, MacLean, Burgess etc.
Keith D
November 26th, 2009 7:55am Report this commentPresident Obama cares not for the UK. This is nothing specific against us, he cares not for the US or indeed any country bar Islamic fundamentalist states. Appeasement, denial of jihad,and marginalisation of long term US allies has been the norm. The attitude seems to be that we must always apologise for advancing the human condition as we shameful Westerners have done for centuries.His disdain for the UK I think comes from our enlightened role in that enterprise.The West had a chance recently to change the dynamics of the entire worlds relationship with Islam but instead of supporting the democratic protests in Iran all we saw was Nuclear appeasement and silence on that disgusting regimes crackdown on its own young. Shameful
jjaahh
November 26th, 2009 8:18am Report this commentThree little words: Downing Street Memo.
Think Defence
November 26th, 2009 9:26am Report this commentFor some more background to this story
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/11/us-to-keep-jca-source-code/
There is another option of course, cancel the JCA and don'y biy either the F18 or Rafale as a replacement, cancel the CVF and put the money into more relevant equipment and personnel.
Shamelessly, I am going to claim publishing earlier than this article in the Spectator!!!
Luke Churchill
November 26th, 2009 11:22am Report this commentWe don't trust or like you anymore you neo-communist Eurotrash. And you spoiled techno loving-small car driving-snaggle toothed-anti-American brats burned your bridges with us long ago. You better start figuring out how you're going to take care of yourselves without America carrying you real quick because It's only a matter of time before we completely cut ties with you ingrates. Go buy your advanced stealth fighters from the facist EU. Oh wait... We should double the price just to remind you leftist Eurotards who really needs who.
A. MacAulay
November 26th, 2009 11:59am Report this commentPerhaps we should buy a good jet from the Russians, I'm sure they have some left over. And they probably don't need software. And it'll save them the bother of pretending not to spy on us and getting Labour Ministers to keep them up to date. After all, breaking into our ministerial offices and computers is so frustraing because some dozy twat has left the CDroms on the bus, train, restaurant or wherever.
A. MacAulay
November 26th, 2009 12:52pm Report this commentAs practically all comments, whatever the topic, start in the present and rapidly find their way in to the past or an emotional facsimile thereof, it may be useful to to point out that England with its follow-up organisations UK/GB was never more sucessful, over 500 years, as when it with consequence followed a single foreign policy, namely to build alliances against whoever and whatever strove to gain control of Western Europe.
We have emerged from the cold war, post-Suez, as auxhilliaries of the US with a subordinate political class which follows a subordination strategy. No wonder the Americans don't take us that seriously.
Rhoda Klapp
November 26th, 2009 12:59pm Report this commentCancel the order, start working on the replacement. Which probably will not be manned. Maybe a range of UAVs with common components. Do it on a skunkworks basis, not through the broken defence procurement lunch club.
David Jennings
November 26th, 2009 1:11pm Report this commentWelcome to the world of Obama. This man has no respect for anything except his agenda. He doesn't see anything in the big picture beyond what he's trying to achieve. He has little concept of how international affairs work. Expect more of the same for 3-7 more years.
In2minds
November 26th, 2009 2:16pm Report this commentI liked the line that the Americans - “don't trust the British not to sell or leak the codes to someone else”.
So another outcome from the stupid Nulabour plan for an ID card scheme tied to all manner of databases open to any petty official in the land.
The UK has rightly earned a reputation of being IT incompetent.
Original Tony
November 26th, 2009 2:24pm Report this commentBritain is in for a rough ride with Obama. He removed Churchill's bust because the latter was involved in reducing the mau mau rebellion, something Obama, as a Kenyan, does not take too kindly to. Watch for ice developing in future relations.
Sir Graphus
November 27th, 2009 3:32pm Report this commentThe least we can do is refuse to hand over that aspergers computer hacker fellow.
Robert
November 28th, 2009 3:47pm Report this commentObama inherits the [freakishly expensive] rotten apple (JSF) FROM Bush.
ENTIRELY DIFFERENT THINGS.
A. MacAulay
November 29th, 2009 9:39am Report this commentAnd Luke Churchill, the US is world champion at exporting it's inflation, the amount of dollars loose in the world being considerably more than the economic product of the USA. Pumping endless billions into defence from the talk Chicago but do Keynes Washington establishment is not the acme of fiscal probity. Or what?
1+1=2 except for Alan Greenspan and the high finace world of Wall St.
Back to top