Raytheon names new CFO

Sur le même sujet

• 

  23 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Israel’s defense export contracts were worth $7.2 billion in 2019

  By: Seth J. Frantzman JERUSALEM — Israel's defense export deals from 2019 totaled $7.2 billion and involved 120 different defense companies, according to the head of the Defense Ministry's International Defense Cooperation Directorate. The country's defense-related sales have been slightly declining over the last decade. Israel's defense export contracts in 2010 also totaled $7.2 billion, but was down to $5.7 billion in 2015. In his announcement, Yair Kulas said the large number of companies selling abroad “reflects the strength of the Israeli defense industry.” The former brigadier general added that he anticipated growth in government-to-government agreements in 2020, but noted that the coronavirus pandemic has “devastated the global economy and the defense sector.” Israel's three largest defense companies are Elbit Systems, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries. The local defense industry has experienced consolidation in the past few years, with IMI Systems now part of Elbit, and Aeronautics Limited acquired by Rafael. Ten years ago Israel was a world leader in UAV sales, but as its focus has changed, unmanned aerial systems now make up only 8 percent of the country's sales. Today's major markets for Israel are in radars and electronic warfare. The Elta ELM-2084 — the radar used in the Iron Dome air defense system — was sold to the Czech Republic in a government-to-government deal last year worth $125 million. Elta is a subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries. Israel has also inserted itself into the missiles market, among other products, in India, where there are several joint ventures. Israel is also a leader in multilayered air defense thanks largely to its Iron Dome and David's Sling systems, which Rafael co-produces with the American firm Raytheon. Elbit and other Israeli companies are also major suppliers of electro-optical technology. However, many Israeli defense deals are not made public, and the destination country for products is often not released. Israel says radars and electronic warfare suites made up 17 percent of the sales last year; missiles at 15 percent; and optics at 12 percent. Naval systems and vehicles were among the smallest portion of contracts. Slightly over 41 percent of sales were in Asia, while Europe and North America each accounted for a quarter of contracts. Africa and Latin America were both at 4 percent each. Israel historically sold UAVs and other items to Latin America and Africa, but the size of the purchases and lack of demand for the highest-end technologies appear to have led to minor contracts in these regions. Israel has been trying to turn the COVID-19 pandemic into an opportunity to work with foreign allies and partners, and not necessarily on defense but also medical needs. Israel's Defense Ministry says that Israel is among the top defense exporters in the world. Certainly per capita, the country is a global leader in defense exports. Up to 80 percent of its defense production is exported, according to the ministry. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/06/22/israels-defense-export-contracts-were-worth-72-billion-in-2019

• 

  4 décembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  How to take EU-NATO relations from words to action

  By: Jeffrey A. Stacey After the successful 2011 Libya operation, it appeared the U.S. and European allies were on the cusp of a new era of working together on international crises, only to stall out thanks to economic austerity and populist elections. Now that the refugee crisis in Europe is subsiding and allied troops and equipment have deployed to Poland and the Baltics, the window of opportunity has once again opened for deepening relations between the European Union and NATO. By setting up an EU-NATO informal track, regularizing operational transitions and embarking on expanded coordination in out-of-area operations — all of which are more crucial, given a potential Brexit and the 2020 U.S. election — these two crucial, overlapping alliances can step into a new era. There are two logical diplomatic tracks to be pursued: a formal track centered on implementation of EU and NATO ministerials/summits, as well as an informal track centered on working through difficult issues and preparing them for decision-makers. Senior officials from both organizations have commented recently that the informal track would be particularly useful for the kind of deep-dive, “peer around the corner” strategizing that busy officials are rarely afforded an opportunity to engage in. The EU is a global leader in what it calls “crisis management,” and what NATO refers to as “stabilization and reconstruction.” Joint planning ahead of such operations, aligning civil/military planning in advance, will allow for improved outcomes in theater. In general, NATO would gain a new capability to act in the immediate aftermath of its military operations when a crisis occurs, and the EU would gain the opportunity to spearhead joint Western crisis management as a matter of course. Taking a cue from the so-called changing of berets in the 2004 NATO mission in Bosnia — when European soldiers involved in the terminating NATO mission simply changed their uniforms out for EU uniforms and remained in place to take part in the EU follow-on mission — there is a strong likelihood that a similar arrangement can be made for deployed civilians. The EU and NATO have ample reasons to agree to regularize operational leadership transitions in moving from the military phase of a conflict to the post-conflict stabilization phase. Here's how it could work: The EU would be designated to spearhead the stabilization phase, having jointly planned this phase of the operation with NATO civilian planners at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe. NATO would commit to always selecting a European as the head of the NATO temporary civilian operation, and would call up a modest number of civilian experts from the nations, who would deploy to theater and engage in a delimited number of core stabilization tasks with the plan for a larger EU-led civilian deployment to absorb the NATO operation. NATO civilian operators would focus on a discrete set of core stabilization tasks awaiting the follow-on EU mission to become more comprehensive. Once a decision to deploy a civilian mission occurs in Brussels, the NATO stabilization mission would devolve to the EU. Most of the civilian experts will already be from EU countries, with the mission head also European. The rest of the NATO civilians can be seconded to the civilian operation mission via framework agreements such as the extant one between the U.S. and the EU that already has seconded Americans to EU missions in Africa. This operational compromise would prevent either alliance from playing second fiddle, ushering in a new era of co-planning and cooperating for both. Why can't both sides “just do it,” i.e., simply enact a leadership transition in theater whenever the need arises? Pragmatism can work in the moment, but it doesn't set precedents, as proven by the fact this is not already happening; past “impromptu” experiences of working together on the ground have not led to any pattern or even expectation of repeat or improved cooperating since. This proposal is firmly in the EU's interests, as it will put it fully in the driver's seat of crisis management and bring the EU the recognition it deserves for its existing capabilities and substantial operational experience. This proposal is also firmly in NATO's interests, for the alliance that almost split over its ongoing Afghanistan operation has no interest in further prolonged field deployments. There is also an additional strategic opportunity for both, as closer EU-NATO cooperation would be an important means for keeping the U.K. connected with its EU partners in the security and defense field following Brexit. But with crises around the world proliferating, in more pressing terms these two critical overlapping alliances among Western allies need to jointly become more operationally ready. Despite the political challenges in numerous Western countries, an agreement to overcome the EU-NATO operational impasse is on the cards. Prior to the negative impact of U.S. President Donald Trump's arrival, NATO-EU relations had been at their pinnacle. With an EU-NATO informal track and a means for overcoming the operational hurdle in hand, substantial progress can still be made prior to the next U.S. administration. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/12/03/how-to-take-eu-nato-relations-from-words-to-action/

• 

  13 septembre 2022 | International, C4ISR

  US Army customizing communication gear for regional challenges

  '€œIt is a big army,'€ said Nicholaus Saacks with PEO C3T. '€œWe have to be prepared to fight in a lot of different places.'€