Cameron's Visit and the US-UK Defense Trade Cooperation Treaty

David Cameron Must Press for U.S. Ratification of the U.S.–U.K. Defense Trade Cooperation Treaty, Heritage Foundation Foundry, July 16, 2010. "The U.S.–U.K. Defense Trade Cooperation Treaty, which was signed in 2007 and ratified by Britain in 2008, has the support of the Obama Administration. But the Administration has not worked hard enough to allay the concerns that have so far prevented the U.S. Senate from ratifying the treaty. During Prime Minister David Cameron’s visit to the United States, he should press President Obama to demonstrate his commitment to advancing the Anglo–American Special Relationship and improving the efficiency of defense procurement in both countries by announcing his intention to work with the Senate to secure the rapid ratification of this treaty."

On Defence Procurement

"Is Reform Enough? Assessing the Gap Between Challenges and Response in Defence Acquisition Reform", RUSI Defence Systems, June 2010, Vol. 13, No. 1. "The current enthusiasm for defence acquisition reform in the US and, especially, the UK cannot be understood outside the broader challenges facing the defence establishment in both nations. Indeed, while it is obviously important that the defence acquisition process be efficient, the hopes currently entertained for increased efficiency are out of proportion with the likely gains. In other words, there is a substantial gap between the broader challenges and the response in the realm of acquisition reform. The hopes persist because they promise to diminish the pain of the gap, and because they offer a way to justify strategic choices that would be less appealing if presented on their own terms."

The British Parallel to Gates' Proposals

British Example Shows Danger Facing American Forces, Heritage Foundation America at Risk Memo #10-05, May 26, 2010. "In a recent speech at the Eisenhower Library in Kansas, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated that “Given America’s difficult economic circumstances and parlous fiscal condition, military spending on things large and small can and should expect closer, harsher scrutiny.” Secretary Gates is right to point to the dangers of America’s soaring budget deficits, but his implication that the U.S. defense budget contributes significantly to the problem is incorrect. The measures that he and the Administration propose are the same ones that have already been tried, and failed, in Britain. The British example shows the danger facing the U.S. forces."

Ten Recommendations to Britain on Defense

Ten Recommendations for the Next British Secretary of State for Defense, Heritage Foundation WebMemo #2893, May 10, 2010. "The May 6 election in Britain has produced an inconclusive result. But no matter what the political color of the government, the next British Secretary of State for Defense will face challenges graver than any that have confronted the Ministry of Defense since 1940."

The Next Excuse for Cuts

The Next Defense Crunch in Britain, Contentions, January 8, 2010. "Contracting out in defense is an important public and political issue in both the United States and Britain. When based on the proper principles, contracting out allows the government to draw on private-sector skills and resources to deliver services more efficiently. But in Britain, Labour’s sketchy accounting methods for the cost of these contracts has created another snare for Britain’s defenses. These contracts, of course, commit the government to future costs. But because Labour has played accounting games that put these contracts on the department books but not the national ones, Britain’s total future obligations will be larger than those shown on the country’s overall accounts."

The Gray Procurement Report and Labour Defense Cuts

Armed Forces May Count the Cost of Cutbacks on Defence, Yorkshire Post, October 28, 2009. "The publication of Bernard Gray's much-leaked report on defence procurement gives all the parties a vital chance to commit to spending plans and sensible reforms that will protect the future of Britain's armed forces."