Friday, April 25, 2014
Cost-cutting breeds counterfeits in US weapons
Global Times | May 30, 2012 19:25
By Global Times
 E-mail   Print

File photo: US's P-8A antisubmarine plane, one of the weapon reported by the SASC used "counterfeit electronic parts from China". Source: Agencies

Editor's Note:

The US Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) recently released a report on counterfeit electronic parts found in the US military system. The report held China primarily responsible for this problem, but also mentioned problems within the US defense industry. But is China really to blame for the issue? What problems does the US defense industry have? Global Times reporter Gao Lei (GT) invited Peter W. Singer (Singer), director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative and a senior fellow in Foreign Policy at Brookings Institution, and Song Xiaojun (Song), a Beijing-based military expert and media commentator, to talk about these issues. 

Peter W. Singer (Singer), director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative and a senior fellow in Foreign Policy at Brookings Institution
Peter W. Singer (Singer), director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative and a senior fellow in Foreign Policy at Brookings Institution
Song Xiaojun (Song), a Beijing-based military expert and media commentator
Song Xiaojun (Song), a Beijing-based military expert and media commentator



GT: The SASC's report holds China responsible for the counterfeit parts found in US weapon system. What's your opinion on this?

Singer: The issue is a complex one. Essentially, the report argued that the Defense Department and its contractors were not doing a good job of monitoring where their components were coming from and ensuring they were trustworthy, and that many of the most problematic were from companies based in China.

What is important is to distinguish between fears over counterfeit parts from fears over corrupted parts. That is, situations where you buy an inferior part posing as something else versus situations where you buy a part that has been deliberately manipulated with.

One is a fear of bad business, the other is a fear of espionage and sabotage. Most of the report was about the first, but much of the media made it seem like it was the second.

Song: I believe this report is a political stunt driven by the US elections. It is obvious that the problem lies within the purchasing procedures of the US defense industry. But US politicians have to find an excuse to attack China to win votes.

China and the US have not established any trade of military equipment. It is likely that those alleged counterfeit military electronic parts were actually commercial electronic parts purchased by subcontractors of US defense contractors through commercial trade channels from any part of the world. So some parts don't come from China, but are brought through a complicated process from elsewhere.

The subcontractors wanted them cheap and thus bought the electronic parts, while major defense contractors failed to examine these parts before installing them into their weapon system.

GT: Why would contractors choose untrustworthy distributors in the first place? Is it due to budget limit in a tight economy?

Singer: Yes. It is not only a matter of trying to save costs, but also how the industry of making and then buying computer chips has changed and grown far more complex.

The chips went from having all their key components being visible to the naked eye in the 1960s to now having literally millions of transistors packed into an area measured in square millimeters.

And, the companies designing them went from just a handful to now more than 1,500 different companies creating 2,500 new designs each year, spreading from the US to Asia to the Middle East. Each of these designs now involves hundreds to thousands of people at multiple locations.

Each of those designs might then be manufactured in anything from the hundreds to the hundreds of millions of chips, going into everything from rice makers to missiles.

Song: The US once had a very strict set of standards in purchasing electronic parts for military use. This was motivated by waves of problems that emerged during the Vietnam War. Those standards applied to almost every electronic part. Every part had to be checked before they could be put into weapon systems.

However, maintaining those standards was very expensive. After the Cold War ended in 1991, former US president Bill Clinton began to cut some of the standards. From 1994 to 2004, around 5,000 standards were removed, which means these parts could then be purchased en masse through commercial channels.

This gives freedom to second and third-tier subcontractors. While they have a list of the recommended electronic parts, they can also purchase parts not specifically designed for military use if they are more advanced or cheaper but with a similar function.

GT: Is there any mechanism in place that will allow the Defense Department to inspect its contractors in case they use counterfeit parts to make weapons?

Singer: No. The oversight is limited to non-existent. But even then, the essential problem is that the chips have become so complex that no single engineer or even team of engineers can understand how all their parts actually work. The process of design is so distributed that no one can know all the people involved. And they are manufactured in such a great number that not even a tiny percentage can be tested.

GT: Some Americans argued that moving factories of electronic parts back to the US will solve this problem. Is it feasible?

Singer: It would help some, in that the manufacturing process might be easier to monitor, and you would have an easier time in distinguishing between trustworthy and counterfeit part makers. But it just isn't feasible to do it for everything.

Remember these counterfeit parts go into everything from military systems to consumer products, everywhere from the US to China to Brazil. A bad chip might go into an F-15 in Hawaii or it might go into a bus in Hunan Province. So the key is not just the US military doing a better job of knowing where its chips come from. It is a concern for us all.

Song: Moving back those factories won't help. The basic problem is that the poor US economy has forced it to look for products that are cheaper and more affordable. Although cheap price means a reduction in quality, but with more limited budgets, the US has to swallow this bitter reality.

Even if it outsource the manufacturing of electronic parts to South Korea or Japan, it is still hard to say whether companies from these two countries won't purchase materials from China.


 E-mail   Print   



Follow @globaltimesnews on , become a fan on Facebook


Post Comment


By leaving a comment, you agree to abide by all terms and conditions (See the Comment section).


blog comments powered by Disqus
Popular now