Combat aircraft seminar
State secretary Espen
Barth Eide, Oslo Military Society 25 January 2006
Ladies and gentlemen,
It is a great pleasure for me to open this
important and timely seminar on the process leading up to the purchase of new
Combat Aircraft for the Norwegian armed forces.
I warmly welcome you all. The high turnout underlines the great public
interest in this issue.
No wonder – given the cost and time
perspectives involved. Whatever outcome, the decisions we make now will affect
CHODS, minsters, state secretaries, Air Force Generals and ministries of
finance and a whole lot of other people for decades to come. If manned aircraft
are at all relevant at that time, the next similar round can hardly be expected
before somewhere around the middle of the century.
Hence, we want to place our sights on the
future, not the past. Although it is important to learn from history, we want
to place ourselves firmly in the 21st Century when we make
decisions. We must make our decision based on what we will be doing, not
on what we used to do.
This has an impact on our defence
procurement policy, our foreign and security policy, and our industrial policy.
A combat aircraft purchase is – due to its nature and size – a major lever for
a conglomerate of other issues. Hence, it is all the more important that we
strive for a systematic, balanced process, based on transparency and
competition between the three candidates.
Why a combat aircraft?
Our part of the world is characterized by peace and stability, our region
is s perceived as safe and free from
military threats. Norway
remains committed to an UN-led world order, based on a solid foundation of
international law. Why then do we need a modern combat aircraft
capability? Is this a contradiction, a
paradox? Not at all!
The security situation on the globe is
changing. One could say that we are in a more fluid security situation. In the
1990’s we found ourselves in the post Cold War era, and after 2001 in the post 9/11 era.
Today, other international dynamics are emerging – or becoming more visible -
than just a few years ago. We are entering the “post-post 9/11” era. This
affects not only far-away theatres – but also our economic and security
environment at home.
Predicting the future is difficult, and
therefore flexibility is paramount. Another question is where in the spectre
from “low end” to “high end” should we aim for?
We see the future development of our armed
forces in a international context, and there has been considerable
consideration not the least within NATO about the future armed forces. In
general, they are becoming more specialized, and not all can have - or want to
have - combat aircraft.
Whenever we participate in international
operations, we do so in a UN or NATO context, cooperating with other allies and
partners. So – international operations alone is not an argument for
maintaining our own modern combat aircraft capability. For example, within the
framework of international cooperation Norway could focus much stronger on
providing ground troops for international operations.
I may be
that countries of comparable size on the Continent - within the division of
labour in NATO - want to solely focus on such capabilities – which are
essential in order to get the job done.
As a
result, if the primary task for the Norwegian Armed Forces were to contribute
to Allied operations in foreign theatres, we might have considered another line
of defence investments than the high-tech air and naval platforms that we are
currently pursuing.
However,
one must keep in mind that Norway
faces a unique set of challenges close to home, very different from the ones
facing almost any other European country. These challenges are in particular
connected to the High North, Norway’s
number one strategic priority. This region is in a league of its own when it
comes to securing Norwegian long-term interests and following up on our
international responsibilities.
Since the
end of the cold war, the threat of an invasion from the East has evaporated,
and at this time there is no military threat to our territory. Nevertheless,
the High North remains strategically important, not only to Norway, but in an international
context as well.
One of
these reasons is the regions considerable energy resources. The global demand
for oil and gas is increasing. Large actors like the USA and the EU are looking to
spread their energy supply on more producing countries.
At the same time, new strong actors are
emerging on the global economic and security arena, with economies that are
growing at a very fast rate, contributing to an increase in the global demand
for energy resources.
Norway is
perceived as a stable and reliable supplier of energy, and compared to a number
of other oil- and gas regions, the High North is characterized by cooperation
and political stability. This increases international attention towards the
High North, - as an important region for the production and transportation of
vital energy resources.
However,
the environment and the natural resources in the region must be seen as a
whole. For example, the region is home to large and important fish stock, and
these must be managed in a careful and sustainable manner.
Although
most of the challenges and possibilities in the High North are connected to
environmental, economic and civilian issues, this does not mean that a military
presence is irrelevant. On the contrary! It is the need to safeguard Norwegian
interests in a long-term perspective that dictates a strong military presence
in the northern parts of our territory. This is an important political signal –
both inside and outside our borders. It is a signal to other countries, to
companies, and to our own population. The message is that we are serious
about our strategic priorities regarding
the High North, and that we accept the consequences of the region’s
strategic location and resources.
This is
why Norway
maintains a focus on high-end naval and air capabilities such as modern
frigates, and it is also why the Government just before Christmas decided that
a high-end, modern combat aircraft capability must be a part of our future
military inventory.
Even
though we have our primary strategic attention directed towards the High North,
we will - of course - continue to contribute to international operations, but
our contribution will be a function of the capabilities we need at home.
Conceptual solution
The need to maintain a strong and flexible military capability and the need
to focus on our responsibility in the High North were core considerations when
the government at the end of last year approved
the conceptual solution for the combat aircraft acquisition. The continued
process includes choosing not only the aircraft, but also determining the
number of aircraft.
This will be the largest Norwegian investment
ever, and it is not, like some have claimed, a choice between a Lada and a
Jaguar. All three candidates are modern and future-oriented platforms. We are
in fact choosing among three top-shelf candidates.
There are also no security policy obstacles
for any of the candidates. On the contrary, there are strong strategic
arguments for all of them.
Moreover, they are all NATO compatible and
will be in use by other Allies, something which is an absolute requirement for
us.
When combat aircraft are in action, things
happen very fast, and it is vital that our future combat aircraft have the
ability to operate integrated with our allies and partners, also in
high-intensity operations, both in Norway and in international
operations.
Operational
versus industrial factors
The most important criterion for the selection of our future combat
aircraft is the ability to solve the tasks of the Norwegian Armed Forces, and
our main focus must be is to secure the best capability for our armed forces.
The aircraft
we select must be a useful tool for contributing to secure Norwegian interests.
The decision we make will have a substantial impact on the ability of the
Norwegian Armed Forces to solve their tasks – in a long term perspective.
However,
all three candidates are good candidates, and they are all under development,
and will all meet our operative requirements. If we decide to make this massive
investment, we will therefore also actively use the combat aircraft purchase as
a means to promote and develop the Norwegian defence industry.
Therefore,
the industrial package will also be a very important criterion when we select
our future combat aircraft. The Government pursues an active industrial policy,
and we see a substantial industrial package as an important strategic tool: It
will serve to strengthen Norwegian defence industry’s competence and
competitiveness, especially in technologically advanced areas. This will create
a platform for industrial spin-off effects in a 40-50 year perspective.
Norway’s
economy is currently very sound and unemployment is almost non-existent. It is
important that we use the advantageous financial position that we are in now,
to prepare Norwegian industry for a future beyond the oil and gas era – before
we wake up to the shock of not having prepared for different economic times. A
vital, high-tech defence industry can play a constructive role in such an
effort.
This is
even more so because the defence sector is one of the few areas where we are
exempted from WTO and EEA regulation, and where the state therefore can play a
more active role. We want to promote the access of a competitive Norwegian
defence industry in an increasingly international defence industry.
Another
reason why the industrial package is important to us is that in a ten year
perspective, the acquisition of new combat aircraft will place a heavy burden
on our defence investment budget. Within this timeframe, it will be very
difficult to find room for other major investments in the defence sector.
It is thus
necessary that Norwegian defence industry must benefit from this investment. We
cannot accept a development where the Norwegian defence industry sits on the
“back-burner” for the next ten years – or more. This would be the equivalent of
erasing a technologically advanced sector in Norwegian industry, resulting in
the loss of many jobs and weakening our national industrial base.
Presented
industrial plans
Last fall we conducted a thorough analysis of the industrial plans
presented by the three candidates. Their industrial packages should be designed
to strengthen
their competitiveness in this decision making process. The competitive edge
will be gained by placing emphasis on contributing to the creation of the
future industry platform in Norway.
The team
evaluating the industrial plans of the three candidates have concluded that
that all three satisfy our basic industrial expectations, but there are still
unresolved issues. However, over the last year there has been positive
development; all three candidates now offer industrial packages that are
considerably improved compared to what they were a year ago, but there is still
room for improvement. It is not the
volume, as much as the technological value of the industrial package, which
will be the pivotal point.
Competitive process
It is important to remember that
this continues to be a competitive process. We feel, however, that we have
achieved the goal we set out for the last year: to establish a genuine and fair
competition with three candidates, and we will maintain a close dialogue with
all three, the Eurofighter, JAS Gripen and Joint Strike Fighter.
Because
the acquisition of new combat aircraft is an issue with wide-ranging
implications, we are working closely with representatives from the Ministry of
Trade and industry, our armed forces, our military research establishment, and
Norwegian industry among others, in order to make the best possible decision -
taking all factors into consideration.
Conclusion – the road ahead
Earlier this
week we decided to sign the Production MoU for the JSF. Simultaneously, we aim
at signing development agreements with the two other candidates in the very
near future. By doing so, we are taking
the fighter project into a new phase, but with all three competitors firmly on
board.
In the
next year, we will continue and intensify the close dialogue with all three
candidates. This will form the basis for the recommendation that we hope to
present to parliament in 2008.
Let it be
clear - we see
the acquisition of new combat aircraft not only in a long-term capability
and strategic perspective, but also in a long term industrial
perspective.
Thank you
very much for your attention. I wish you a very fruitful and stimulating
seminar.
