There's been an awful lot written in the last week on the left side of the blog-o-world about John McCain's involvement in the recent Department of Defense decision to award its contract for new aerial refueling tankers to Airbus (a subsidiary of German-French-Spanish aerospace conglomerate EADS) rather than U.S.-based Boeing. Here is an example, by no means the only one, of the America Should Be Buyin' American commentary. Boeing claims (although I don't fully believe) that nearly 9,000 U.S. jobs could be lost as a result. And what sense does it make for our military to be dependent on foreign suppliers? Valid points, these are.
To which I respond, Where the hell have you been for the past 30 years? You'll find fewer foreign products in Pier 1 Imports than in the hands of the average American soldier.
Italian pistols (the Beretta M9), German submachine guns (H-K MP5), Belgian machine guns (various FN Herstal models), British jet engines (Rolls-Royce)….
the list could go on. And that's not even counting the hundreds of "American" vehicles and products composed largely of foreign parts. The military has traditionally bought only from U.
S. companies as a matter of policy. In practice, the aforementioned foreign companies would simply open up an American office; so we're technically not buying from Beretta, we're buying from "Beretta USA." To say that this is little more than a convenient legal fiction of "American" origin is an understatement.
I regularly get up in arms (pun intended) about the continued exodus of manufacturing work from the American economy, but this case feels an awful lot like trying to close the barn door long after the horses escaped.
Like American consumers, the American military's buying habits focus on superior-quality foreign products and polyglot products made of parts and labor from all around the globe but branded by U.S.-based multinationals. Even if the Air Force "bought American" in this case, the Boeing 767-based entry isn't really "built" in Washington. "Assembled" is the better word – of parts made in the U.S., China, Japan, Britain, Canada, Mexico, and half of the other countries on the damn planet.
Today a Honda Accord (built in Ohio and Indiana, containing 65% domestic parts) is a foreign car while a Chevy Aveo (built in Korea, containing 4% domestic parts) is American. If it hasn't already become so, the concept of American- or foreign-made is on the fast track to becoming completely meaningless. The reality of this situation is no different than the reality of your consumer purchases. Do you make yourself buy a Ford out of a sense of duty to the country? Or do you remind yourself that American cars are merely cheaper – and in every other way inferior – on your way to the Honda or Toyota dealership? Let's can the phony outrage at the idea that the military is doing exactly the same thing. If Boeing's creaky, four-decade-old design had anything going for it other than "It's cheap!" and "You're honor-bound to buy 'American'!" we might not be having this conversation.
Nick says:
Patriotism in buying habits is only important if the American company in question contributes to someone's campaign–witness the post regarding the M16/M4 series rifles from a while back, pretty much the only non-specialized military-issue firearm still made in America.
Kulkuri says:
Boeing's KC-10 is only two or three decades old. Buying Boeing doesn't mean you are buying American. They get parts and sub-assemblies from many countries.