The Real Reason Lawmakers Don’t Want to Buy Russian Helicopters

Senators cite problems with Russia. But home-state interests are ever-present.

Caption:A Pakistani Air Force Mi-17 helicopter flies over the Presidential Palace during a parade marking the country's National Day in Islamabad on March 23, 2014. Pakistan National Day commemorates the passing of the Lahore Resolution, when a separate nation for the Muslims of The British Indian Empire was demanded on March 23, 1940.
National Journal
Billy House
Add to Briefcase
Billy House
May 20, 2014, 4:22 p.m.

Pentagon com­mit­ments to pur­chase MI-17 trans­port heli­copters from a Rus­si­an com­pany for the Afghan mil­it­ary would be scrapped un­der le­gis­la­tion that is gain­ing at­ten­tion this week, cham­pioned by law­makers par­tial to their home-state heli­copter man­u­fac­tur­ers.

The law­makers’ ob­ject­ives may be rooted in pa­ro­chi­al con­cerns over tough times fa­cing the U.S. heli­copter in­dustry, says Loren Thompson, a de­fense ana­lyst with the Lex­ing­ton In­sti­tute. But Rus­sia’s in­va­sion of Ukraine and an­nex­a­tion of Crimea is en­abling the ef­fort “to at­tach it­self to a broad­er agenda — with bi­par­tis­an sup­port,” he says.

“I think the is­sue has united home-state in­terests with what’s viewed as a “˜high­er pur­pose,’ “ Thompson said.

Fu­ture pur­chases of the heli­copters made by Rus­si­an state arms deal­er Rosobor­on­ex­port already have been barred as a res­ult of law­maker con­cerns last year that the com­pany was sup­ply­ing arms to Syr­ia, even though U.S. mil­it­ary of­fi­cials have said the Rus­si­an-made craft is pre­ferred in this in­stance over Amer­ic­an mod­els, in part be­cause the Afghan forces have ex­per­i­ence op­er­at­ing it.

But this week, pres­sure is mount­ing in both cham­bers — and in both parties — to also halt the pro­cure­ment of at least 18 un­delivered heli­copters that are already part of Pentagon com­mit­ments total­ing about $1 bil­lion. If the or­ders were com­pleted, it would mean that a total of 63 heli­copters have been sup­plied to the Afghan Air Force.

In the Sen­ate, a bi­par­tis­an group of law­makers have in­tro­duced the Rus­si­an Weapons Em­bargo Act of 2014, which would for­bid “the dir­ect or in­dir­ect use of Amer­ic­an tax dol­lars to enter con­tracts or agree­ments with Rosobor­on­ex­port and im­me­di­ately ter­min­ate ex­ist­ing con­tracts and agree­ments with the agency.”

The le­gis­la­tion, which spon­sors want to be con­sidered in a markup of the Na­tion­al De­fense Au­thor­iz­a­tion Act this week by the Sen­ate Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee, also would pro­hib­it con­tracts with any do­mest­ic or for­eign com­pany that co­oper­ates with Rosobor­on­ex­port to design, man­u­fac­ture, or sell mil­it­ary equip­ment.

“The hos­tile situ­ation in Ukraine is yet an­oth­er re­cent ex­ample of why the United States should stop do­ing busi­ness with Rus­sia and its arms deal­er,” said Sen. Richard Blu­menth­al, D-Conn., who in­tro­duced the meas­ure along with Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Dan Coats, R-Ind.

Blu­menth­al’s state is home to Sikor­sky Air­craft, which could be a be­ne­fi­ciary should the agree­ments with the Rus­si­an arms deal­er be can­celed. In com­ments on the Sen­ate floor in late Oc­to­ber, Blu­menth­al said, “I may be par­tial to heli­copters made in Con­necti­c­ut. The best heli­copters in the world are made in Con­necti­c­ut by the Sikor­sky em­ploy­ees….”

But Blu­menth­al, a mem­ber of the Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee, then went on to al­lege that “the con­tract to award these heli­copters was man­aged in a way to pre­vent Amer­ic­an heli­copter com­pan­ies from bid­ding on the work.” Blu­menth­al said a 2010 De­fense De­part­ment ana­lys­is con­cluded that the Boe­ing-made CH-47D Chinook heli­copter is the most cost-ef­fect­ive Amer­ic­an op­tion for the Afghan Air Force over a 20-year life cycle.

Al­though that is not a Sikor­sky craft, Blu­menth­al said, “at the end of the day, “˜Made in the USA’ ought to be the rul­ing prin­ciple. Made in the USA — Amer­ic­an heli­copters for the Amer­ic­an mil­it­ary and Amer­ic­an al­lies.”

Cornyn, whose state is home to Bell Heli­copter, said, “Con­sid­er­ing Rosobor­on­ex­port’s close con­nec­tion with Vladi­mir Putin and his cronies, and its ties to bru­tal dic­tat­ors who’ve com­mit­ted mass at­ro­cit­ies, there is no reas­on for our mil­it­ary to con­tin­ue to rely on equip­ment from thugs mas­quer­ad­ing as a le­git­im­ate busi­ness.”

Mean­while, In­di­ana­pol­is is home to the Ray­theon Ana­lys­is & Test Labor­at­ory, a former U.S. Navy avion­ics test lab with ex­pert­ise in de­vel­op­ing flight com­puters and war­fare sys­tems for at­tack heli­copters. “Giv­en Rus­sia’s hos­tile ac­tions in Ukraine, busi­ness as usu­al is un­ac­cept­able,” Coats said.

In the House, Demo­crat­ic Rep. Rosa De­Lauro, whose dis­trict in­cludes Sikor­sky and who has fought the Rosobor­on­ex­port heli­copter pur­chases for sev­er­al years, also re­in­vig­or­ated her ef­forts. House Rules Com­mit­tee aides say they ex­pect at least one of two amend­ments to the de­fense au­thor­iz­a­tion bill that she has pro­posed to be cleared for floor ac­tion later this week.

Ac­cord­ing to sum­mar­ies provided by De­Lauro’s of­fice, one amend­ment would “pro­hib­it con­tracts or sub­con­tracts” with Rosobor­on­ex­port and “re­quires the ter­min­a­tion of any cur­rent con­tract with the firm.” The amend­ment would also bar the Pentagon from en­ter­ing con­tracts “with any for­eign com­pany that co­oper­ates with Rosobor­on­ex­port to design, man­u­fac­ture, or sell mil­it­ary equip­ment.”

The oth­er amend­ment would block the Pentagon from en­ter­ing in­to a con­tract with Rosobor­on­ex­port un­less the sec­ret­ary of De­fense, in con­sulta­tion with the sec­ret­ary of State and dir­ect­or of na­tion­al in­tel­li­gence, cer­ti­fies that the firm has ceased trans­fer­ring weapons to Syr­ia, Rus­sia has pulled out of Crimea, Rus­si­an forces have with­drawn from the east­ern bor­der of Ukraine, and Rus­sia is not oth­er­wise act­ively destabil­iz­ing Ukraine.

Thompson, the de­fense ana­lyst, says the fact that ef­forts to sanc­tion Rus­sia are linked to home-state in­terests does not mean these law­makers are ad­voc­at­ing for a less­er product. The best product, he said, is one that also falls in line with the na­tion’s policy goals and needs.

“The So­vi­ets may have had the best rifle in World War II,” he said. “But that did not mean it was in the best na­tion­al in­terest for us to buy those rifles.”

What We're Following See More »
WITH LIVE BLOGGING
Trump Deposition Video Is Online
7 hours ago
STAFF PICKS

The video of Donald Trump's deposition in his case against restaurateur Jeffrey Zakarian is now live. Slate's Jim Newell and Josh Voorhees are live-blogging it while they watch.

Source:
SOUND LEVEL AFFECTED
Debate Commission Admits Issues with Trump’s Mic
8 hours ago
THE LATEST

The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.

Source:
TRUMP VS. CHEFS
Trump Deposition Video to Be Released
9 hours ago
THE LATEST

"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."

Source:
A CANDIDATE TO BE ‘PROUD’ OF
Chicago Tribune Endorses Gary Johnson
12 hours ago
THE LATEST

No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."

NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
×