National Defense Contract Awarded to European Company

A storm is brewing on Capitol Hill, one the likes of which hasn't been seen since 2006, when the Bush administration secretly signed off on a deal with Dubai Ports World to allow that foreign firm to manage six American ports. Dubai Ports World was forced to sell the contract due to the unprecedented adverse public backlash the news generated, which subsequently fostered congressional opposition as well. The storm currently brewing is a controversy also with national security aspects.

The Air Force has awarded European-based Northrup Grumman a $40 billion contract to build a much-needed fleet on in-flight refueling tankers -- and Congress wants to know why. Why has a national defense contract been given to a foreign company? Why does the Air Force believe that awarding a national defense contract to a foreign company is not a possible national security problem? With the current economic woes confronting the United States, would it not be more advantageous from a public relations perspective for a defense contract to remain with an American firm, even if that American company charged a few more dollars to fulfill the contract?

CNN reported Friday on "Lou Dobbs Tonight" that the Air Force awarded the contract to Northrup Grumman EADS (Airbus) because the European company presented a larger, less expensive aircraft than did Boeing, which had held the government contract for 50 years. Officials at the Pentagon said that those factors and the fact the European model could refuel more aircraft at one time, coupled with Northrup Grumman's reputation for timely delivery, helped decide the issue. Some of the Air Force's refueling tankers are 50 years old.