Can the DoD Trust Brazil with American National Security?
Next month, the U.S. Air Force is expected to select a bid for a new aircraft to serve in a counterinsurgency attack role for the U.S. and its foreign partners. It seeks an inexpensive light attack and armed reconnaissance and training aircraft for countries that have little need or resources for supersonic jet fighters. One major competitor for the Air Force contract is the Brazilian company Embraer.
Working with international manufacturers is paramount to promoting stronger international relationships. However, potentially partnering with a country that hosts deep anti-American sentiment is concerning at besWarranted or not, the core of this sentiment stems from troubled trade agreements and Brazil’s ever-differing approach to foreign policy, that, at times, diverges in significant ways from U.S. policy.
The absence of a close knit and significant trade relationship between the United States and Brazil is notable. There have been frequent disputes over subsidies of key agricultural exports. A second reason for Brazil’s “anti-Yanqui” sentiment dates back to the events of the Cold War. This outlook has been intensified both by perceived unfair trade practices after the end of the Cold War and by opposition to U.S. foreign policy following the attacks on September 11.
Many of Brazil’s exports compete directly with American products. Brazil produces and exports coffee, citrus, sugar, beef, and poultry — the same products that the U.S. produces in larger quantities. Although former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso generally supported free trade, there were bitter disputes over subsidies, tariffs, and quotas during the negotiations for a Free Trade Agreement of the Americans (FTAA) that took place while he was in office.
These negotiations faltered, and trade disputes continued during President da Silva’s term. In March 2010, Brazil raised tariffs on U.S. cosmetics, appliances, and cars to counter U.S. cotton subsidies. The disagreements and troubled outlook continued.
Another area of tension between Brazil and the United States relates to Iran. In November 2009, President da Silva invited Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Brazil. In May 2010, da Silva helped broker a deal in which Iran would ship only a portion of its low-enriched uranium to Turkey for reprocessing; the rest would remain in Iranian hands, where it could be further enriched for nuclear weapon production.
The United States must also consider Brazil’s propensity for heavily subsidizing its corporations. Embraer is the world’s third-largest aircraft manufacturer and the producer of both civilian and military aircraft. It was founded in 1969 as a state-owned company. Even after Embraer’s supposed “privatization,” the Brazilian government continued to support the company through massive subsidies. These subsidies were condemned by a World Trade Organization panel.






The next logical question is why would we buy an airplane from Brazil at all? We build fine aircraft here in the United States and, given this miserable economy, I’m sure American aircraft manufacturers could use the business. Why should we subsidize manufacturing in another country when those same jobs could easily go to Americans? Just another example of the Obama administration putting the needs of other countries above ours. Remember that when you vote next year.
Currently there are no airplanes being built in the US that are anything close to what Embraer is offering – the EMB 314 Super Tucano is a small single engine turbo-prop driven craft that is cheap to make and fits the role for which the DOD is looking for like a glove. Embraer found a niche market and seems to have a winner – and for a bit over $10 million per copy US makers would be hard pressed to match it.
This plane is a smaller modern day version of the Douglas A1 Skyraider.
If we do buy it we should first demand a change to the company policy of ceding to the winds of change in politics.
Currently there are no airplanes being built in the US that are anything close to what Embraer is offering – the EMB 314 Super Tucano is a small single engine turbo-prop driven craft that is cheap to make and fits the role for which the DOD is looking for like a glove. Embraer found a niche market and seems to have a winner – and for a bit over $10 million per copy US makers would be hard pressed to match it.
That’s not true. The Hawker Beechcraft AT-6B (light attack version of the T-6 turboprop trainer) is built in America and flying. Here’s a pilot report from Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine.
Hawker Beechcraft Corp. (HBC) is morphing its T-6B Texan II military training aircraft into the AT-6B, a welterweight contender in the U.S. Air Force’s upcoming Light Attack and Armed Reconnaissance (LAAR) competition. The attack variant utilizes a beefed-up T-6 airframe, capable of carrying 3,350 lb of external stores on six wing hard points. To help offset the combat version’s additional weight and drag, Pratt & Whitney Canada is developing a 1,600 shp version of the PT6A-68 turboprop engine for the AT-6, similar to the 1,600 shp -68 engines that power Pilatus PC-21 and EMB-314 Super Tucano.
For the aircraft’s role as a weapons delivery platform, the AT-6 is being fitted with the A-10C Thunderbolt II’s Central Interface Control Unit (CICU) mission computer that will tie the aircraft’s avionics suite into a net-centric combat environment and give it a MIL-STD-1760 “smart weapons” interface. The aircraft will feature a night vision-compatible cockpit, plus the HOTAS sensor and weapons controls carried over from the second-generation T-6B Texan II trainer. It also has an Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS) and Situation Awareness Data Link (SADL). These functions integrate the aircraft into U.S. Department of Defense’s digital command and control battlefield network that links virtually all air and ground warfare assets.
Technically you are correct – however the AT-6B is still under development. Hopefully they will fledge this aircraft soon and will win the contract. I hate seeing American $s going overseas when we need jobs here at home.
I agree, the US needs jobs, this aircraft should be built by US companies.
It could be built cheaper here, if the NLRB wasn’t busy trying to keep corporations from building facilities in right to work states.
We have seen our manufacturing base disappear. Would we have won WW2 if we didn’t have the manufacturing base of that era. Could we again win a major war, if all our suppliers were overseas, and our supply chain open to disruption by an enemy.
Embraer already has a plant in Melbourne, FL.
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=businessweekly&id=news/bav/2011/02/28/12.xml
They could expand this plant or open another one to meet any “Made in America” requirements.
LS46 said exactly what I thought. . . . Why is there no mention of this in the obama propaganda. . . I mean, MSM?
The more we outsource the closer the war comes to our borders. With software companies outsourcing development. The manufacture of computers is all in Asia, we are already in a lot of trouble. Obama not the first President to sell us to the lowest bidder.
Remember that Brazil appears to tolerate Hezbollah operating in its territory running arms, drugs and laundering money in the South.
Also don’t forget that Spooky-dude has beeg financial interests in Petrobras so maybe in Embraer as well.
So, we shouldn’t buy the most capable COIN aircraft from Brazil, and should instead drive them into cooperation with our enemies?
We aren’t talking SDI here folks. There is no rational reason Brazil shouldn’t be allowed to bid. I’m fairly confident American manufacturers can create a competitive design. I’m very confident that the increased competition will result in a better deal for the taxpayer.
“Drive them into cooperation with our enemies”.
They don’t need to be driven when they have leaders like Lula da Solva who expressed the desire for Brazil to join OIC.
What drove Turkey in 2003 to deny passage to US forces wanting to get into Northern Iraq? Screwed up all those lovely plans.
Turkey a NATO member now in league with Iran and supporting Syria did not need to be driven, but will give any excuse to satisfy the question, why. Even that the Joos did it!
I am very familiar with all of the possible competitors for this project and the bottom line is that the Super Tucano from Embraer is a far superior product.
The Raytheon product is not really competitive with the Brazilian one. Additionally, the Raytheon personnel associated with this project do not truly understand the needs of this project and appear unwilling to change.
Raytheon is also several years behind in active armored defense. Israel’s IAI introduced the “Trophy” active defense system for tanks several years ago, but the US Army elected not to adopt it, instead choosing to wait for a system Raytheon was “working on”. That system still isn’t available. Meanwhile, Trophy (aka “Windbreaker”) proved itself in real combat along the Gaza border earlier this year. One wonders how many US troops might have been saved if the US Army had decided otherwise.
US defense contractors are no longer the leaders they once were. The F-35 program (another example) remains troubled, to the dismay of many US allies that were counting on it. So what we’re seeing is part of a broader, more disturbing trend.
Raymond,
The real issue is that Raytheon is firmly stuck in a Cold War proprietary and more high tech mindset. Which is exactly the opposite of what you need for this kind of project.
This needs to be a fully transferible product that can be given to virtually anyone and doesn’t require fourth or fifth generation manintenance capabilities. For example, controls need to be cable and hydraulic, beacause third world countries can’t work on fly by wire systems. Communications and navigation systems need to be off the shelf and commercially availble due to releasibility issues with high tech US only assets. The system should be tested with a full array of Russian, German, French and British armaments as mny countries using this system won’t be eligible for cluster bomb munitions, guided weapons systems, etc. from the the US.
Give it to Brazil to redistribute the wealth seems to be the policy as it was with oil.
This has to be a joke…Al Queada operates throughout Brazil with impunity. CIA,FBI,NSA are fully aware of this activity.During April 2011 a large shipment of military grade weaponry (destination:Iran) was intercepted in the port city of Porto Alegre – a heavily arab community. In Rio de Janeiro, March-April 2011 an Islamic terrorist shot up a public school in the suburb of Realengo (hushed up by the former President Lula). Criminality, in every urban and rural area of Brazil is higher than in our neighbor to the south (Mexico)…yet US (MSM) reports ziltch about this. Corruption in every level of government is rampant (so much for copyright protection). 60% of all judges (and attorneys) in Brazil are corrupt. American businesses are strongly considering divesting themselves and their companies of their interests in Brazil. So, the US AIR FORCE is going to give away military secrets and hardware to a country that harbors deep seated hatred for everything USA??? Why not just give the contracts to Al Queada…then that would take the luster away from Mr. “O” having killed OBL, wouldn’t it??? Instead, we’ll just award the contract to the second best thing Brazil, Al Queada and Palestinian’s mouthpiece. Did anyone mention, Brazil’s President is an avowed Marxist (has published some books on this matter)? Dilma, Brazil’s President, viscerally hates the USA. And the US Air Force is going to award Brazil with its military and hardware secrets??? Somebody please, shake some sense into our DoD!!! VOTE!
Secrets? We are talking WWII era technology with updated electronics and a turboprop engine.
and then Brazil will sell those updated electronics to Iran …..
Uh, this contract is to provide light attack aircraft to the Afghans.
Anyway, those Tucano are efficient, field tested and really sexy; and we don’t build P-51′s anymore. Maybe this is just a case of getting the right product at the right price. Simple laws of economics working for our benefit.
I have type ratings in 2 Embraer products (The EMB 145 & 190) and experience with 2 others (the 110 ‘Bandit’ & 120 Brasilia). They are crap. Using anything made by EMB is nothing more than job security for the mechanics. Embraer boosts sales with artificially low prices because they are underwritten by the Brazilian government (which even got WTO attention).
They do not even design or make their own planes, they just assemble them. The ‘NEW’ designs they offer are the ressurect dead projects of other companies or are largely designed by foreign engineers. The EMB-120 Brasilia (which was designed largely by formered Boeing engineers) was the springboard for the bug ridden EMB-145. The EMB 170 (which was the basis for the 170-195 series) was a redesign of the failed Dornier 428 jet.
Their major components are or were made by others. Engines & avionics from America, wing boxes from Kawasaki Heavy Industries and so on. The first wing boxes they made on thier own did not have proper quality control and resulted in 3 engine failures due to metal shavings that were not cleaned out. The flap systems are still failure prone. The avionics are so poorly integrated that pilots do not trust them.
I could go on but you get the point. Remember the airline pilot’s adage “If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going”.
NO defense contract should be awarded to ANY foreign company, regardless of what kind of relationship we have with them.
Then I guess we should remove all the Martin Baker ejection seats in our jet fighters since they’re made in the UK, right?
I find it hard to believe that a former official in the Reagan and Bush Sr administration and an a former ambassador wrote this piece. Yes, former president Da Silva made the inexplicable decision of getting chummy with Ahmadinejad; but new president Dilma Rousseff crearly does not agrees with that and has clearly stated that she’s not pleased with Iran’s human rights record.
Even Al Jazeera noted that, but this fact apparently escaped the authors; Brazil even voted last March in favor of a United Nations Resolution to investigate Iran’s human rights record (a note to the authors: the blue, underlined text is a “link” to a source backing up my assertion).
The authors seem very concerned about Brazil protectionist policies, which I agree are wrong headed. But which country is hurt the most by them, the US or Brazil? Brazilian consumers are the one paying the price; the US has free trade agreements with most Latin American countries, Brazil doesn’t. This is evidence of bad economic and trade policy, not of “deep anti-American sentiment”.
Are Brazilians murdering Americans on the street? Are they burning American flags? New president Rousseff even restarted a bidding process on the purchase of fighters aircraft that her predecessor almost awarded to the French, in a move that benefited Boeing’s F-18.
What’s even more ironic? The plane that the US is considering to purchase as part of the “Imminent Fury” program (Embraer EMB-314 Super Tucano) has US-built components. This have prevented the sale of this plane to countries perceived as hostile to the US (such as Venezuela).
So I ask again: if Brazil is “a country that hosts deep anti-American sentiment”, why does the US have no problem providing components for its military industry? Does that makes any sense at all? I’m sorry, but this post is really way below the standards of any publication. Mr. Daremblum and Mr. Cropsey are entitled to their opinion, but we as reader should demand the facts that justify them.
Kind regards,
Ulises
Such a curious contradiction then that over 70% (by value) of the parts in Embraer products are “Made in USA”. I’ll wager that is more American content than you will find in the products of certain auto manufacturers that jus HAD to be bailed out for the good of the country…
So buying the best airplane for the lowest price is bad for America… how exactly? Anyone mentioning military secrets has never dealt with export control, or worked for the DoD as at a foreign country for that matter. The classified systems will never be seen in Brazil, they will be installed after delivery.
But don’t let reality get in the way of xenophobia.
The real question should be can the American people trust the DoD seeing how they are run by the UN now.