05 décembre 2012 Romandie.com (AFP)

BERLIN - La chancelière allemande Angela Merkel s'est réjouie mercredi de l'accord sur la recomposition du capital du groupe EADS qui permet selon elle un partenariat franco-allemand équilibré au sein du groupe.

Grâce à l'accord trouvé le partenariat franco-allemand au sein d'EADS peut se poursuivre de façon équilibrée. L'esprit qui prévalait à la fondation du groupe est ainsi respecté, a commenté Mme Merkel dans un communiqué.

Dec 4, 2012 ASDNews Source : Saab AB

Defence and security company Saab has signed a contract for further deliveries of components for the Carl-Gustaf man-portable weapon system.

The order has a total value of approximately SEK 156 million and comprises components for ammunition to the latest version of the Carl-Gustaf system. The order is placed under an option included in a previous contract which Saab signed on 31 October 2012.

“Carl-Gustaf is an important part of many defence systems across the world. The system has been further developed for decades in order to meet new demands. For every new model, more new customers are also added which we of course welcome”, says Tomas Samuelsson, head of Business Area Dynamics.

The industry’s nature is such that depending on circumstances concerning the product and customer, information regarding the customer will not be announced.

The Carl-Gustaf system has a long and successful history, and still proves itself to be a highly modern and capable Ground Support weapon. The system has successively been modernized and adapted to meet new requirements. With the Carl-Gustaf M3 version Saab offer state-of-the-art capability for demanding customers investing in the future.

Deliveries will take place during 2013.

04 December 2012 thalesgroup.com

The Royal Navy has described how the combination of a Type 23 frigate fitted with Thales UK’s Sonar 2087 and a Merlin helicopter equipped with the Thales FLASH dipping sonar has delivered an outstanding anti-submarine warfare capability.

HMS Northumberland, sailing as part of the UK’s Response Force Task Group on the Cougar 12 Mediterranean deployment, recently conducted advanced anti-submarine warfare (ASW) training with a friendly submarine.

The exercise involved the ASW surface ships trying to ‘sink’ the hunter-killer submarines, while simultaneously trying to avoid being sunk by their stealthy submariner counterparts.

Northumberland is one of eight Type 23 ships fitted with Sonar 2087, a towed array system that enables frigates to hunt the latest submarines at considerable distances and locate them beyond the range from which they can launch an attack.

Type 23 frigates also carry the Merlin helicopter that is fitted with the Thales FLASH dipping sonar. The combination of 2087 and FLASH makes the Type 23 a formidable antisubmarine warfare operator.

Northumberland’s Commanding Officer Commander Paddy Dowsett said: “The opportunity to conduct extended and realistic training against a submarine has been most welcome.”

“It reinforced the view that a Type 23 frigate such as Northumberland, fitted with Sonar 2087 and a Merlin helicopter, remains the most potent anti-submarine warfare platform of any navy at sea today.”

Phil Naybour, head of Thales UK’s naval business said: “Once again, the combination of Sonar 2087 and FLASH sonar has proved to be a phenomenal anti-submarine warfare asset to the Royal Navy. We are proud to be such a key sensor supplier to the Royal Navy.”

The eighth and final Type 23 to be fitted with the system, HMS Portland, has been undergoing an extensive refit at Rosyth dockyard that included the installation of Sonar 2087.

The 2087 system is a low-frequency active sonar, consisting of both active and passive sonar arrays. The system is manufactured at Thales sites in the UK (Cheadle Heath in Manchester and Templecombe in Somerset) and France (Brest).

About Thales and Thales UK

Thales is a global technology leader for the defence and security and the aerospace and transport markets. In 2011 the company generated revenues of £11.4bn (€13bn), with 67,000 employees in 56 countries. With its 22,500 engineers and researchers, Thales has a unique capability to design, develop and deploy equipment, systems and services that meet the most complex security requirements. Thales has an exceptional international footprint, with operations around the world working with customers and local partners.

Thales UK employs 7,500 staff based at 35 locations. In 2011 Thales UK’s revenues were around £1.4bn.

October 2012 - By Major Michael Wise, US Army - disamjournal.org

The European Union (EU) is an institution founded upon the precept of shared economic prosperity to prevent conflict. The idea of increasing interdependence in the coal and steel industries expanded into a trade union that eventually led to a common currency for seventeen of the EU’s twenty-seven members. The economic benefits of this regional trade liberalization scheme are apparent, but what are the effects of integration and coordination on industries that are undeniably strategic in nature? One might expect that the efficacy of EU and European Defense Agency (EDA) would not transcend into the aerospace and defense industry, but it turns out that the EU and EDA have a positive effect on exports in this arena. The consequences of this phenomenon reinforce the foundation upon which the European project set out to accomplish. There are lessons to draw from integration of the aerospace and defense industry as well as indicators that the US government and defense firms alike should consider.

The EU

European integration is an endeavor that has failed throughout the ages, often resulting in competition and bloody wars. As Adreas Staab puts it, “From the Roman Empire of Julius Caesar to Napoleon, Hitler, and Stalin, European history is marked by many attempts to organize the multitude of nations and ethnicities into a more or less coherent political entity with competing views of how the different states should be related and the degree to which autonomy and sovereignty should be preserved.“¹ But something encouraging has transpired in Europe since the end of WWII. A few forward thinking elites gathered together to establish an economic union that would bind the war-making industries of coal and steel production among the usual states perpetrating war. Jean Monnet, a French entrepreneur and functionalist, presented a plan that would sow the seeds to what would develop into the EU. While there was always disagreement on the role and scope of institutions in integration, a constructive environment (owed largely to US security guarantees and fiscal support) allowed for a lasting peace and functional institutions to emerge. The debate between minimalism versus maximalism translated into proponents of intergovernmental models versus supranational bodies. This debate goes on even today, especially as the EU attempts to manage itself through a real challenge for the first time where the economic benefits are difficult to see amidst the current economic crisis.

Aside from the challenges of integration from nationalist tendencies and questions of sovereignty, the EU delivers massive benefits in the form of a common market with minimal barriers to trade among its members. The common currency is the obvious example of reducing trade costs whereby the drag of currency exchange is evaporated. Among members there are also customs agreements that essentially liberate any trade barriers within the EU and coordinate external economic policies resulting in a uniform arrangement. The EU tries to keep competition fair among its members and maximize industry potential by exploiting the benefits of comparative advantage and economies of scale. It also attempts to address the advantages of state aid among members. Article 87(1) of the European Community Treaty prohibits state aid in the form of subsidies, provided it affects trade between member states.² This distinction is important as will be pointed out in the pursuant discussion on World Trade Organization (WTO) cases involving US and European aerospace firms.

In sum, the EU facilitates European firm competitiveness by keeping trade barriers low and allowing for firms to maximize their productivity through specialization and market access through free trade areas. The implications are profound across a variety of industries. Surprisingly (or perhaps unsurprisingly, depending on one’s perspective), these advantages are translated even to the aerospace and defense industries. The ability of EU member states to generate war-fighting equipment is becoming increasingly interdependent.

The EDA

A regional cooperation of states, such as the members of the EU, will tend to view threats to their individual (and collective) national security differently. They will thus arm and equip themselves according to those different, sometimes divergent, assumptions. In theory, this doesn’t necessarily have to result in completely uncoordinated defense acquisitions. After all, maritime or land powers might simply adjust volumes and concentrations of the major categories of defense equipment. But in practice, European militaries developed a hodgepodge of equipment that is sometimes able to be integrated among (some) members and sometimes is only workable in an autonomous environment. Indeed, under Article 296 of the European Community Treaty, member states are permitted to make the bulk of their defense purchases on a national basis. With the view that European military forces must promote interoperability through tactics, techniques, and procedures, so must their equipment procurement be coordinated. In 2004, the Council of Ministers established the EDA to coordinate defense capabilities. In doing so, it implemented strategies to promote research, development, and armaments cooperation, and strengthen the European Defense Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB).³

The strategy to strengthen the EDTIB is grounded upon three underlying principles. The “three C’s,” serving as a guide in EDTIB enhancement, are capability driven, competence and globally competitive. The EDA endeavors to ensure Europe is equipped and capable to deal with security threats of the future by clarifying priorities with regard to military and industrial capabilities, consolidating demand, increasing investments, considering security of supply and increasing competition and cooperation within the industry.⁴ The EDA initiated efforts to improve Europe’s industrial capabilities in the aerospace sector with the Future Air Systems Project. Among other things, the main contribution of the EDA in this project is to examine the supply chain and to promote engagement with EU bureaucracies.

The idea of a coordinated strategy in European defense and procurement planning is not generally regarded in a positive way. This may be a reflection of an antipathy for real coordination among members’ national priorities. The EDA recognizes the apparent challenges of managing twenty-seven different views and has set its own top capabilities priorities appropriately. They include counter-IED, medical support, ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance), helicopters, cyber-defense, multinational logistics support, CSDP (Common Security and Defense Policy) information exchange, strategic and tactical airlift and finally fuel and energy.⁵ These priorities reflect a shift from territorial defense to a force projection capability. It happens that while conventional territorial defense warfare is more simplified for the warfighter, the limited intervention mindset involving projection of small forces is less industry intensive (think less tanks and more agile light units). This prioritization allows the European defense firms to focus on a more narrow market.

Analysis of institutional Effects on Performance

The EU seems to increase productivity by allowing its members to specialize in those areas where they enjoy a comparative advantage, and the EDA seems to allow its members to specialize within the global aerospace and defense market according to its strategy. The consequences of exploiting such advantages are extremely beneficial to the European aerospace and defense industry. This study analyzed export data from UN Comtrade of thirty-nine European countries from 1996 to 2010. The EU and EDA status is depicted in figure 1. It accounted for changes in membership status during the expansion years of 2004 and 2007. This analysis is limited to commodities related to aerospace and defense, in addition to components. These included ammunition, missiles, armored vehicles, warships and aircraft (civilian and military). Figure 2 is a graphical representation of total exports and depicts a steadily increasing trend. Other reports confirm this trend. The EU Observer cited SIPRI data indicating EU arms trade growth despite the economic crisis that embroils the rest of European industry.⁶
    

What could cause such an increase? The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) published a study indicating that while European defense spending cumulatively fell over the period covered here, expenditures on equipment remained constant (see figure 3). The increase is clearly not the result of domestic consumption. One might expect that integration would encourage specialization and dispersion of factor production; thereby supply chain effects might explain the increase in exports. This appears to be part of the story, but not all of it. Figure 4 shows the total exports separated by trading partners outside the EU and intra-EU trade. The intra-EU trade rises steadily as expected but exports to the rest of the world increase even more rapidly. These results indicate that European aerospace and defense firms are increasing their competitiveness abroad.

What is most interesting is that a regression analysis of exports on institutional membership makes a compelling case for the EU and EDA. This study included multivariate regressions where the independent variables included institutional membership status as well as a qualified and quantified variables depicting conflicts. These conflict variables normalized for an increase or decrease in global conflict that might have spurious effects on aerospace and defense export volume. These variables were generated from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program from the International Peace Research Institute in Oslo. The analysis further considered fixed effects of trading partners of the exporting countries. Furthermore, the logs of the export volume served as the dependent variable so that data from low volume exporters could be compared to that of high volume exporters. The results showed that both EU and EDA membership serve as reliable predictors of export growth.

At the Firm Level

Using data from Defense News Top 100 firm rankings reported each year from 2000 to 2010, this study is able to depict individual firm trends during a similar period. Figure 5 displays defense revenue of every European defense firm that made the Defense News list from 2000 to 2010. Table 1 lists the top European defense firms for 2010. It is apparent that most firms enjoy the same trend of increasing revenue as was observed on European aerospace and defense exports. All this during an increasingly sparse domestic market for these defense-related products. This trend is confirmed by the EU Observer’s report on SIPRI’s 2010 analysis noting that most of the large firms saw measured growth while a few smaller firms witnessed contraction in revenue.⁷

The results and trends demonstrated in figure 5 beg more in depth investigation of some of the notable cases. The top performing firms vary in state involvement, product specialty and location, though all reside in the larger economic powers of the core of Europe. This study will examine BAE Systems, EADS, Finmeccanica and Thales.

BAE Systems is a London-based defense firm that currently ranks second only to Lockheed Martin (US) in defense revenue. It is a multinational company with strong markets in the EU, US, Saudi Arabia, Australia, and India. Its products range from cutting-edge aerospace technology to conventional armored vehicle production. It is closely tied to US defense firms and has an integral part in the production of the multinational joint strike fighter, the F-35 Lightning. The firm plays an important role in the UK’s nuclear technology as well as high-end shipbuilding. BAE also develops cyber defense and information technology systems. Though primarily a UK based firm, it is also invested in several European aerospace and defense firms.

The European Aeronautic Defense and Space (EADS) Company is a conglomerate of several consolidated defense firms in Europe. Headquartered in the Netherlands, its main subsidiaries are in France, Germany and Spain. These include Airbus and Eurocopter. It mainly produces aircraft and electronic systems and its primary markets are in the UK, North America, the Middle East, Russia, India, China, Brazil and Australia.

Finmeccanica is one of Italy’s largest industrial groups and is partially nationalized (30 percent). It also mainly produces aerospace technologies and develops components of Europe wide defense products like the Eurofighter (joint venture between BAE and EADS). 

The Thales Group is a French defense firm specializing in communication technology. It is also a somewhat nationalized firm, with state ownership at about 27 percent and is closely associated with Dassault Aviation.

The contrast and confluence of these competing firms is remarkable. BAE and EADS are publicly traded while Finmeccanica and Thales rely heavily on state support and investment. Finmeccanica, BAE and EADS work closely on the Eurofighter project among others.

EU and state programs give these firms even greater advantage, sometimes in a controversial manner. Airbus, the European civilian passenger aircraft manufacturer, and Boeing, the US aerospace firm, are engaged in a tit for tat legal battle citing improper subsidies on both sides. The US filed suit to the WTO that Airbus received an unfair advantage in government loans and launch aid. The EU countered with accusations of illegal tax breaks for production facilities in certain US cities. After nearly seven years of legal arguments, the WTO ruled in separate findings that both parties had cause to their accusations, though not as severe as initially brought forth. The competition and complaints are likely to continue for years to come. This case demonstrates two key advantages of the EU institutions. First, the very launch aid that the WTO declared illegal provided the necessary capital to get the industry up to a profitable level in Europe. Second, the EU was organized and large enough to bring great weight to the WTO in advocating the European industry’s case.

What About Externally Generated Competition?

This study has shown the advantages the European aerospace and defense industry enjoys due to its integrating and coordinating policies. The EU maintains regulations that protect firms from adverse effects of competition within the confines of its members, but firms also compete with each other in the external market. For instance, the top firms attribute their most important markets to the US, the Middle East, Australia, and India. Regulations on the conduct of member states in serving as an advocate for domestic industries do not appear to exist.

Competition for lucrative fighter aircraft contracts is generally fierce. In 2011, after years of deliberation, Switzerland announced that it would award Saab (Sweden) with the contract to furnish its military’s new aircraft. Saab had been in competition with Dassault Aviation (France) and Eurofighter (BAE/EADS/Finmeccanica). The evaluation was highly politicized, and leaked documents exacerbated speculation of unfair political pressure. Fast-forward a few months to January 2012 and the competition is eerily familiar, this time in India. The Indian military announced it would award its aircraft procurement contract to Dassault Aviation. This follows intense lobbying by the French government to woo buyers for its fighter. A foreign market is essential for France in particular because of the high priority it places on its strategic independence. Without a foreign buyer, its production lines would have to cease since it cannot afford to perpetuate production given its own budgetary constraints. Having been the lowest bidder in the Indian competition, it is entirely likely that the French government subsidized some of the costs in the agreement, thus undermining its competitors at Saab and Eurofighter. This kind of undercutting could also have taken place in bidding in the UAE and Brazil.

What are the Implications for the Future?
    
The characteristics of the EU institutions and proclivity to export could be defining a new type of military industrial complex. This European military industrial complex is one that enjoys the benefits of government advocacy but does not influence state fiscal policy. Instead, the European aerospace and defense industry maximizes profit and productivity by selling its war fighting equipment abroad. The trend of diminishing defense spending coupled with increased defense revenue points to the likelihood of such a scenario. The EU and EDA are likely to act as complementary institutions to facilitate and coordinate specialization in a way few countries will be willing to do. These firms will have all the aforementioned advantages but will not be constrained to a domestic market that will demand exclusivity. Instead, they will be allowed—and even encouraged—to pursue profit maximization while various member states exert political influence to secure contracts. The pursuit will not be uniform, as exemplified by nationalized firms in France and Italy. That said, European firms would most likely become even more integrated to reap economic benefits. The European aerospace and defense industry market penetration is also interesting to consider. These firms produce products that are not necessarily the most advanced (the US firms still clearly hold the advantage), but are very competitive in a cost to capability perspective. They court areas where there is a demand for their products at their price. Considering that these areas are places like the Middle East, India, Brazil, and the Pacific, these firms are likely to continue to do well. These areas are not only emerging markets with enormous potential, but also they are highly prone to armed conflict. With the influence the European aerospace and defense industry may exert upon the EU, it is not inconceivable that EU foreign policy (however uncoordinated) might seek to stabilize its market by accepting conflict abroad.    

On the other hand, the US military industrial complex must take note of these trends. It is fortunate the US firms are so integrated with European firms. The US leadership of the F-35 program is an important multinational production proof of concept. The problem is that the US commands a great amount of influence due to its own consumption capacity. The estimated US share of orders accounts for half of the demand. With more and more participants reevaluating their orders, that share is likely to increase. This actually perpetuates the status quo of the US military industrial complex generating a supply and forcing domestic consumption. It also reinforces the European firms’ practice of benefiting from an export surplus. The US is likely to seek to maintain its dominance on innovation and comfortable lead in technology. It must seek to exploit comparative advantage across the aerospace and defense industry. In doing so, it might be worth increased cooperation with the EDA or even to establish somewhat of a bilateral body to maximize efficiencies in the transatlantic defense industry. Such an arrangement would have limitations, of course. The Boeing and Airbus competition is not likely to subside, but then neither is competition among EU members abroad.    

Members of the defense cooperation community should take heed of these trends and seek to support cooperation with European firms and take advantage of internal EU competition where possible. The EDA’s priorities should serve as a guide to where the EU would like to head with respect to capacity development. The US has a lead in some of these areas. It might be worth engaging the EDA to narrow its list to further maximize comparative advantage vice duplicating efforts of US firms willing and able to sell products like ISR and strategic airlift equipment. The US has a lead in these sectors. Furthermore, US security and industry would profit from factor specialization, particularly in cyber defense, fuel and energy. Efforts in defense cooperation in key emerging markets such as Brazil and India will benefit greatly from understanding developing trends in the European defense industry. If the Dassault Aviation case serves as a guide, officers should pay attention to important contract competitions—not for the winners, but for those who lost out in recent battles who must secure a contract in order to maintain production. These firms may receive benefits from the state in the form of diplomatic persuasion or subsidies (or both) in the interest of maintaining domestic industry and employment. It is more probable that the nationalized firms would profit from such action compared to the consortium or public companies. Those firms might have their own method of lobbying through private means.

Conclusions

The results of this study indicate that not only do EU institutions and policies benefit European consumption but they also enhance their export capacity abroad. This is most likely attributable to the efficiency-promoting incentives of EU policies and coordinating efforts of the EDA. In doing so, industries across European borders are able to pursue their comparative advantages and reap the benefits of specialization. These benefits do come with a trade off. In specializing, the European military industrial complex becomes dependent upon mutual cooperation and coordination. This is exactly what Jean Monet had in mind at inception of the European Coal and Steel community. As the EDA progresses and European defense products increase their global market share, the world will observe a new type of military industrial complex. This new model is one that does not influence its government to put its products to use (as in the US), but rather may encourage others to fight among themselves.

About the Author

MAJ Michael Wise, US Army, is a Foreign Area Officer (FAO) specializing in European Affairs. He holds a BS from the United States Military Academy and is pursuing an MA from the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. His assignments in Europe include Germany and France.

Notes

1  Staab, (Kindle Locations 114-116).

2  Artis and Nixson, 137.

3  European Defense Agency.

4  Ibid.

5  Ibid.

6  Nielsen.

7  Ibid.

Bibliography

UN Comtrade. “United Nations Commodity Trade Statistics Database.” Accessed online 1 May 2012 at http://comtrade.un.org/db/default.aspx

Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) and Centre for the Study of Civil Wars, International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO). “UCDP/PRIO Armed Conflict Dataset.” Version 4-2009.

Berteau, David; Ben-Ari, Guy; Hofbauer, Joachim; Levy, Roy. July 29, 2011. “European Defense Trends: Briefing Update.” Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Washington DC.

Andreas Staab. The European Union Explained, Second Edition: Institutions, Actors, Global Impact. Kindle Edition.

European Defense Agency. “Official Website of the EDA.” Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://www.eda.europa.eu/Aboutus/Whatwedo/Missionandfunctions

Artis, Mike; Nixson, Frederick. “The Economics of the European Union: Policy and Analysis.” Third Edition. Oxford University Press

.

Nielsen, Nikolaj. February 27 2012. “EU Arms Trade Booming Despite Crisis.” EUObserver. Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://euobserver.com/13/115380

BAE Systems. “BAE Systems Website.” Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://www.baesystems.com/home?_afrLoop=217640151098000

EADS. “EADS Website.” Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://www.eads.com/eads/int/en

Finmeccanica. “Finmeccanica Website.” Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://www.finmeccanica.it/Corporate/EN//index.sdo

Thales. “Thales Website.” Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://www.thalesgroup.com/Group/Investors/Shareholding/

Defense Industry Daily. 29 April 2012. “Switzerland’s F-5 Fighter Replacement Competition.” Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/switzerland-replacing-its-f-5s-04624/

Rothman, Andrea; Rupert, James. January 31 2012. “Dassault Aviation’s Rafale s Lowest Bidder in India Jet Fighter Contract.” Bloomberg News. Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-31/dassault-rafale-is-lowest-bidder-in-india-combat-jet-contest-2-.html

JSF.mil. 10 November 2009. “Estimated JSF Air Vehicle Procurement Quantities.” JSF PSFD MOU. Accessed online 6 May 2012 at http://www.jsf.mil/downloads/documents/JSF_PSFD_MOU_-_Update_4_2010.PDF

03 December 2012 Press release issued by Cassidian - defenceweb.co.za

Cassidian is rigorously pursuing its agenda of achieving a sustainable boost to its competitiveness and is slimming down its structures. Its aim is to save at least 200 million euros a year by 2014. As part of these savings it is intended that up to 850 jobs will be reduced, with the focus primarily on management and administration.

Bernhard Gerwert, CEO of Cassidian, said: "Our objective is to have the closest possible customer relationships and at the same time to increase our competitiveness." In addition to its traditional European sales markets in Germany, France, Spain andthe United Kingdom, Cassidian will further strenghten its market presence in the MiddleEast, Brazil, India and the USA.

Gerwert continued: "This is why cost reduction and efficient structures are the top priority for us. With leaner structures we can guarantee shorter response times. In this way we intend to continue growing and boost our profitability to benchmark level." He further pointed out that "We want to manage the planned headcount reduction without any enforced dismissals."

Gerwert and his new management team laid down the current course of action in September this year, placing the emphasis on competitiveness and profitable growth. The detailed planning now being implemented will lead to lean managementstructures and a product portfolio focused on defence and security.

"We will stabilise our defence business and invest stronger in selected security segments, such as border protection systems and communication systems," said Gerwert.

Rencontre ministres de la Défense franco-italien

04/12/2012 Linda Verhaeghe International

A l’occasion du 30e sommet franco-italien, lundi 3 décembre 2012, les ministres de la Défense ont signé une feuille de route initiant de nombreux projets communs, en particulier  dans le domaine capacitaire. Une démarche qui participera à approfondir une coopération de défense déjà bien établie entre les deux pays et à renforcer plus généralement l’Europe de la Défense.

Le 30e sommet franco-italien s’étant tenu à Lyon, lundi 3 décembre 2012, a réuni les chefs d’Etat et de gouvernement des deux pays, François Hollande et Mario Monti, ainsi que plusieurs de leurs ministres respectifs, parmi lesquels les ministres de la Défense, Jean-Yves le Drian et Giampaolo Di Paola.

Le président de la République française et le président du Conseil de la République italien ont, à cette occasion, réaffirmé leur souhait d’approfondir la coopération entre les deux pays, notamment en matière de Défense. Les ministres de la Défense français et italien ont ainsi signé une feuille de route visant à donner une nouvelle impulsion à leur coopération militaire bilatérale, et par conséquent à l’Europe de la Défense.

Cette feuille de route traduit, en effet et pour commencer, la volonté de la France et de l’Italie de développer de nouveaux projets dans le domaine opérationnel, ainsi que dans celui de l’armement (ravitailleurs en vol, satellites d’observation, etc.). Un premier bilan des actions entreprises sera établi dès l’été 2013 lors d’une réunion du Conseil franco-italien de sécurité et de défense qui se tiendra à Rome, selon le communiqué établi par l’Elysée à l’issue du sommet.

Elle réaffirme ensuite la vision que partagent les deux nations quant à la nécessité de relancer l’Europe de la Défense, « afin de répondre aux défis soulevés par les lacunes dans les capacités militaires européennes, de faire face aux crises qui peuvent apparaître et de contribuer à l’exercice par l’Union européenne de ses responsabilités dans le monde », d’après la même source.

La coopération franco-italienne s’exprime par plusieurs rendez-vous : un sommet annuel à l’image de celui du 3 décembre et un Conseil franco-italien de défense et de sécurité (CFDIS) réunissant les chefs d’Etat et de gouvernement. Le prochain CFDIS se tiendra en avril 2013.

Il existe en outre un comité bilatéral « armement » entre Directeurs nationaux de l’armement (DNA), ainsi qu’une réunion « 2+2 » entre DNA et Chefs d’état-major des armées, permettant de favoriser la concertation entre les responsables des deux pays et de se préparer conjointement aux enjeux du futur, notamment à travers une vision capacitaire commune.

Les armées françaises et italiennes constituent aussi des allieés de premier ordre dans le cadre de plusieurs programmes d’armement, parmi lesquels ceux relatifs aux frégates « Horizon » et « Fremm », celui de torpille légère « MU90, ou encore dans le domaine spatial avec les programmes de satellites d’observation « Helios » et « Musis », des satellites de télécommunication « Athena Fidus » et « Sicral 2 », mais aussi des programmes de missiles, etc. L’Italie est d’ailleurs le premier partenaire industriel de la France.

Elles sont tout autant engagées côte à côte dans le cadre de plusieurs opérations, notamment dans la région de la Corne de l’Afrique.

Dec 4, 2012 ASDNews Source : Babcock International

Sandown class minehunter HMS Grimsby left Babcock’s Rosyth dockyard on Friday (30 November) with enhanced operational capability following a successful six month Support Period (Docking) (SP(D)).  This was the first Sandown class refit to be undertaken under the Surface Ship Support Alliance (SSSA) Class Output Management (COM) Phase 2 arrangements, under which Babcock leads the Sandown class COM team.

HMS Grimsby has received a number of upgrades and improvements, significantly enhancing the ship’s operational capability, sustainability and habitability standards, during the tightly scheduled support period.  These include a first-of-class replacement of the entire fire detection system; an upgraded high pressure air system (extending system life and offering cost and space benefits); the Defence Information Infrastructure (DII) which provides a coherent infrastructure to enable information sharing and collaborative working across the defence sector network; the Centrix communications system; a fresh water embarkation unit (monitoring purification of shore supplied water); a package to enhance operations in hot climates; and a galley upgrade package.

These enhancements have been in addition to a substantial maintenance package, in which the vessel’s sustainability in extreme climates has been improved by an extensive renewal programme of protective coatings on the hull and weather decks, and considerable work has been undertaken to the air conditioning system, as well as removal and overhaul of the bow thruster units.

Babcock Managing Director Warships, Mike Whalley, commented: “We are delighted to be delivering HMS Grimsby in the best possible materiel state, while also reflecting optimum value for money for her support period.”

The knowledge of the vessel’s material state and experience gained from this support period will now be retained and built upon by the Babcock-led Sandown class COM team.  This will be invaluable for the forthcoming Sandown class refits to be undertaken by Babcock under the auspices of the SSS Alliance on HMS Penzance, and HMS Pembroke and Bangor.  Knowledge and experience gained will be captured to inform future work scope development, to minimise emergent tasks and achieve further efficiencies and savings.

SSS Alliance Sandown COM Team Leader Paul Holdsworth said: “The challenge for the COM and the wider SSSA is to provide an effective through life support service.  The goal is to optimise platform availability for the available budget to meet Fleet commitments.

“The close working relationship between the Ship’s Staff, MOD, Babcock Rosyth operations and production teams and the Sandown COM has ensured HMS Grimsby’s support period was completed on schedule, safely and to the quality standard.  This demonstrates one of the fundamental advantages that underpins the SSS Alliance Agreement: the joint responsibility in sharing expertise, knowledge, and skills in delivering successful performance for the Surface Ship Support Enterprise.”

Captain Jonathan Fry RN, the MoD’s Frigates & MCM Team Leader said: “I am delighted that HMS Grimsby is back at sea in such a good material state and with significantly enhanced capability.  The Sandown Class delivers a vital element of the Royal Navy’s operations worldwide, and the high quality support delivered by the Sandown COM and Rosyth dockyard is fundamental to their success.”

HMS Grimsby now leaves Rosyth for sea trials before returning to the Fleet in 2013.

03/12/2012 Fabrice Gliszczynski – LaTribune.fr

La recomposition de l'actionnariat du groupe européen d'aéronautique et de défense doit être annoncée mardi soir après bourse.

Difficile de contredire François Hollande lorsqu’il a déclaré ce lundi à Lyon qu'"un accord était "proche" avec l'Allemagne sur la recomposition de l'actionnariat d’EADS. Selon nos informations l’annonce est prévue ce mardi soir. Certains protagonistes du dossier espéraient même une annonce ce lundi soir après bourse, mais en raison du grand nombre de parties concernées et d’avocats autour de la table, tout ne pouvait pas être ficelé.$

Volonté de Berlin d'entrer au capital

"EADS va changer quant aux participations des Etats. C'est la volonté de l'Allemagne de se substituer par une banque publique à Daimler et nous aurons donc à recomposer un partenariat", a déclaré François Hollande lors du sommet franco-italien.

Cet accord "doit permettre de donner là encore de la stabilité mais également aussi une démarche d'avenir pour cette grande entreprise", a encore dit le président français.

La France et l’Allemagne vont disposer de 12% du capital d’EADS tandis que l’Espagne en détiendra entre 4 et 5% (lire l’article sur les détails de l’accord EADS : un nouveau pacte d’actionnaires sans droit de veto pour les Etats ). Ces trois Etats ne possèderont pas plus de 30% du capital dans le nouveau pacte d’actionnaires. Appelés à sortir d’EADS Daimler et Lagardère n'en feront plus partie.

04/12/2012 Mer et Marine

Il y a quelques jours, la flotte italienne est sortie en force de ses bases afin de réaliser un exercice majeur regroupant le gros de ses moyens de combat. En tout, 16 bâtiments de surface, deux sous-marins, 26 aéronefs et près de 3500 hommes ont été engagés dans ces manœuvres, baptisées Amphex 12-2. Les deux plus grandes unités de combat italiennes, le porte-aéronefs Cavour (avec à son bord des avions AV-8B Harrier) et le porte-hélicoptères d’assaut Garibaldi, participaient à cet exercice, qui s’est déroulé en mer Ionienne.

03.12.2012 ( Xinhua )

Le gouvernement belge a décidé vendredi de fixer les effectifs de l'armée à 32.326 militaires pour 2013.

Il s'agit du maximum de 31.126 militaires du cadre actif et élèves, comptés dans l'enveloppe en personnel militaire, de 500 militaires du cadre actif comptés hors de l'enveloppe en personnel militaire précitée, de 700 militaires qui peuvent être rappelés sous les armes. La Constitution belge stipule que les effectifs de l'armée doivent être fixés chaque année.

Cette décision a été prise lors d'une réunion du Conseil des ministres.

Sur proposition du ministre de la Défense, Pieter De Crem, le Conseil des ministres a aussi approuvé la participation belge à des missions internationales, dont 124 militaires et le navire de commandement et d'appui logistique Godetia ainsi que le chasseur de mines Narcis de la navale belge dans l'opération multinationale de déminage dans la Manche au large de la France du 5 au 15 novembre, 166 militaires à bord de la frégate Louise-Marie de la navale belge et un hélicoptère ainsi qu'un détachement de la composante Terre dans l'opération de lutte contre la piraterie Atalanta au large des côtes somaliennes de fin novembre 2012 à début février 2013.

Malgré sa petite taille, l'armée belge est active sur la scène internationale. Après avoir participé à des opérations en ex-Yougoslavie et en Libye, elle est présente en Afghanistan, au Liban et en RDCongo à l'heure actuelle.

03/12/2012 L'Expansion.com

L'Allemagne ne pouvant envoyer des soldats sur tous les fronts, la Chancelière a annoncé son intention d'utiliser plus souvent les livraisons d'armes à des fins diplomatiques, pour soutenir " ses partenaires dignes de confiance ". L'Arabie saoudite négocie ainsi l'achat de centaines de chars de combat et de véhicules blindés allemands.

Le redéploiement d'une Allemagne " décomplexée " sur le plan militaire et diplomatique se poursuit. Après avoir participé, pour la première fois depuis 1945, à une guerre offensive contre la Serbie en 1999, puis s'être engagé avec un contingent de près de 5000 hommes en Afghanistan à partir de 2001, Berlin semble avoir jeté aux orties ses réticences en ce qui concerne les ventes d'armes à destination de pays non-membres de l'OTAN. Dans sa dernière édition, le magazine Der Spiegel révèle ainsi que l'Arabie saoudite, qui est déjà sur les rangs pour acheter 270 chars de combats Leopard 2, a déposé une nouvelle demande auprès du Conseil fédéral de sécurité allemand afin de d'importer plusieurs centaines de blindés de type GTK Boxer, un transport de troupes monté sur pneus et équipé au choix d'un lance-grenade ou d'une mitrailleuse lourde, idéal en rase campagne... comme pour la répression de manifestations.

Cette révélation, non commentée par le gouvernement allemand puisque les réunions et les décisions du Conseil de sécurité sont soumises au secret le plus total, a déclenché de violentes réactions de la part des partis écologistes et de gauche, mais pas seulement. L'ancien ministre des Affaires étrangères d'Helmut Kohl Hans-Dietrich Genscher a également protesté: "Avec le recul, on constate que la retenue allemande dans sa politique d'exportations d'armes s'est révélée exacte et l'on devrait s'y tenir", a déclaré cette figure emblématique et respectée du parti libéral.

Merkel assume sa diplomatie des ventes d'armes

Le "deal" saoudien n'est pourtant pas isolé. Ces derniers temps, l'Allemagne a vendu deux corvettes porte-hélicoptères à l'Algérie qui se prépare à passer une commande de 1200 véhicules blindés, mais aussi 130 Léopards 2 d'occasion à l'Indonésie, deux sous-marins à l'Egypte et quelques milliers de fusils d'assaut livrés aux quatre coins de la planète. Entre autres. De même, alors que Berlin proteste fermement contre la relance de la politique de colonisation des territoires occupés par Israël, Der Spiegel nous apprend aussi que le Conseil de sécurité a donné son feu vert pour la vente de lance-roquettes à l'armée israélienne. Le leader écologiste Jürgen Trittin est catégorique : "On ne peut pas vendre des armes dans ces pays!".

La Chancelière n'est pas de cet avis. Lors d'un discours prononcé fin octobre au congrès annuel de l'armée allemande, Mme Merkel a expliqué qu'à l'avenir, son pays comptait intégrer plus fortement les exportations d'armements dans sa doctrine de sécurité : "Il est dans notre intérêt d'aider nos partenaires à établir ou à maintenir de manière efficace la sécurité et la paix dans leurs régions", a-t-elle expliqué. Pour elle, les livraisons d'armes font clairement partie de cette aide: "Ceux qui se sentent responsables du maintien de la paix mais ne peuvent pas jouer un rôle actif dans toutes les régions du monde, sont appelés à aider leurs partenaires dignes de confiance à prendre cette tâche à leur compte", a ajouté la chancelière. Et d'après Angela Merkel, ces partenaires dignes de confiance sont nombreux. Il s'agit des pays de la Ligue arabe, et ceux de l'Union africaine et de la Communauté économique des États de l'Afrique de l'Ouest (CEDEAO). Pas moins !

Face à cette perspective, les "marchands de canons" allemands, confrontés à un fort rétrécissement des budgets européens de défense, peuvent se frotter les mains. Pour Mme Merkel, l'exercice est cependant périlleux à l'aube de l'année électorale qui s'annonce : "Angela Merkel sait que la grande majorité des Allemands est hostile aux exportations d'armes", rappelle le député de gauche Jan van Aaken (Die Linke) : "Il semble donc qu'elle justifie ses décisions par anticipation, comme pour construire une sorte de mur pare-feu avant la campagne", explique-t-il.

03 décembre 2012 Par Hassan Meddah – Usine Nouvelle

La direction d'EADS reconnait que des discussions sur le remaniement de son actionnariat sont en cours. Il est question que la France et l’Allemagne en sortent avec une participation identique dans le groupe d’aéronautique, de défense et spatial… à l’opposé de ce que souhaitait son patron, Tom Enders.

L’Allemagne directement au capital d’EADS, voici enfin la conclusion logique de l’échec de la fusion BAE-EADS qui se dessine. La direction de la maison mère d’Airbus, réagissant ce matin aux rumeurs de presse annonçant un remaniement de son actionnariat, a reconnu des discussions sur "de possibles changements dans le structure et l’actionnariat et de la gouvernance de l’entreprise."

L’opération discutée lors du conseil d’administration du dimanche 04 décembre 2012, serait la suivante : l’Allemagne et la France se retrouveraient enfin avec une participation identique dans le capital d’EADS, soit 12 ou 15 % selon les différents scénarios étudiés. Pour cela, la banque publique allemande Kfw rachèterait les actions nécessaires auprès du groupe automobile Daimler et du consortium Dedalus regroupant des investisseurs privés et publics. Pour sa part, l’Espagne conserverait ses 5 % d’EADS.

Daimler et Lagardère cèdent leurs actions

Ainsi Tom Enders, le président d’EADS, boit le calice jusqu’à la lie. A l’origine du projet de méga-fusion avec le britannique BAE, il voyait une opportunité unique pour réduire l’influence des Etats dans son groupe. Décidé à se débarrasser d’actionnaires à ses yeux trop contraignants dès lors qu’il s’agissait de se développer sur les marchés de défense à l’international, il était allé jusqu’à leur proposer une "golden share" en échange de leur participation. Deux mois après l’échec officiel des négociations, ce scénario se déroule à l'envers. Les actionnaires industriels fuient le navire : Daimler et Lagardère souhaitent céder au plus vite leurs actions. Et l’Allemagne, qui a longtemps critiqué l’interventionnisme de la France dans la stratégie d’EADS, suit désormais son exemple.

Le rêve impossible de Tom Enders

Le patron d’EADS doit faire son deuil de gouverner une "entreprise normale". Comment pouvait-elle l’être ? Astrium, la filiale spatiale, gère les missiles de la dissuasion nucléaire française; Cassidian, la branche défense et sécurité, détient les actifs du groupe au sein  du consortium de l’avion de combat Eurofighter et du fabricant de missiles MDBA… Sans oublier les 130 000 emplois associés à ce groupe de haute technologie fortement contributeur dans la balance commerciale des pays européens.

Enders va devoir continuer à gouverner son groupe en respectant le sacro-saint équilibre franco-allemand dans ses choix industriels et dans la composition de ses équipes. Peu après sa nomination à la tête du groupe le 1er juin dernier, il s’était libéré de cette contrainte en décidant d’installer le siège du groupe à Toulouse malgré le tollé suscité en Allemagne. C’était avant l’échec de la fusion et du réveil de la tentation des Etats de tirer la couverture à eux. Reste à savoir maintenant si celui qu’on surnomme Major Tom rentrera dans le rang ou pas.