3 June 2001

THE WEAPONS MERCHANTS:
A BACKGROUND PAPER ON HEGEMONY IN ARMAMENT PRODUCTION
http://www.nuclearfiles.org/plrc/WeaponsMerchants.pdf
Compiled by Bob Aldridge

It has been my contention for many years that the overriding impetus behind the arms race,
and now the ballistic missile defense race, has been the profits earned by weapons manufacturing and
the other types of exploitation that superpower status protects. In this paper I will be discussing five
large corporations that have now grown to dominate a significant portion of weapons systems
contracting. They are Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, and TRW. I am
not implying that these five are the only ones making weapons, or grabbing for a bigger piece of the
cake.1 I see their operations as only a microcosm of the larger, more pervasive activity in the overall
race for monopoly and profits that has infested our environment and our lifestyle.

This is not a paper to read word-for-word from beginning to end. It is too long and the litany
is too monotonous for that. This paper is more a graphic representation of how five large
conglomerates are dominating a significant segment of America’s warmaking capability -- how they
are profiteering at the expense and suffering of others. It is also a reference on who makes what.
I have chosen these five weapons makers because their products are at the cutting edge of
death and destruction. The weapons and weapons systems shown below are the activities of these
five corporations that I am aware of at this time. I have probably missed some and as more
information comes to my attention I will add it on subsequent revisions to this paper. I would also
like to emphasize that these are only the cutting edge -- the infrastructure to support them is even
more immense and equally profitable to produce. And of course there are the black budget items that
are too super secret for us taxpayers to know what we are financing. Finally, I will not introduce the
vast market for weapons and weapons systems to foreign countries. For a more overwhelming and
mind-boggling picture of the activities of these five corporations, visit their web sites (see References)
and go to their “products” pages.

Page 2 of PLRC-010603

PUSHING THE MONOPOLY LIMITS: FORMAL MERGERS

Early in the 20 th century America passed anti-trust laws to prevent any one company from
monopolizing a given market, and to prevent companies from conspiring to set prices. This resulted
in the breakup of Standard Oil Corp., among others. Large corporations have ever since been striving
to maximize profits while, at best, skirting the edge of these laws and, at worst, finding methods to
disregard these laws in a manner that cannot be easily recognized.

Since at least the mid-1960s there has been a constant string of mergers and buy-outs which
have resulted in fewer and fewer companies amassing a disproportionate share of the market. We
have seen this happen in grocery chains, the automotive industry, petroleum companies, aircraft
manufacturers, internet providers, ad infinitum. These mergers transcended national borders and they
have gained momentum in recent years.

This conglomeration of corporate power is nowhere so visible as in military contracting.
Mergers have now about exhausted the tolerance of watchdog agencies tasked to prevent
monopolies. Now military contractors are experimenting with other means of circumventing the
letter of anti-trust laws while violating their spirit.

For some time I have been concerned over this endless string of corporate mergers. I have
observed that each merger results in “downsizing” the work force to maximize profits. Because
mergers are, at least ostensibly, reviewed to assure compliance with anti-monopoly laws, sometimes
a segment of the organization being bought must be spun off as an independent company as token
observance of the anti-trust spirit. An example is when Lockheed Martin had to break off an
independent Space Systems/Loral before it could absorb the remainder of Loral Corporation, so that
Lockheed Martin would not monopolize the satellite field. Never mind that the president of the new
and independent Space Systems/Loral sat on the Lockheed Martin board of directors. What mattered
was that this spin-off satisfied the Federal Trade Commission.

Often a large company will voluntarily sell a division of its business that is not profitable
enough to satisfy the board of directors. Or, it may sell a division that no longer fits into the fields
in which that company wants to specialize -- read as monopolize. In either case, another company
with a different area of specialization may buy that division to compliment its “specialization.”
Mergers are also taking place in other countries but, except where they involve US
companies, they are beyond the scope of this paper.

I will now show why I chose the five companies mentioned above for the subject of this paper.
Between 1993 and 1997 tactical aircraft manufacturers were reduced from 7 to 3, tactical missile
builders from 8 to 3, and military satellite contractors from 8 to 3. 2 That means there are currently
only three companies in each of these fields who are qualified to bid as prime contractors (often called
systems integrators). Those companies are:

Missile manufacturers: Lockheed Martin
Boeing
Raytheon

Page 3 of PLRC-010603

Satellite manufacturers: Lockheed Martin
Boeing
TRW

Tactical Aircraft: Lockheed Martin
Boeing
Northrop Grumman

We can see that Lockheed Martin and Boeing appear prominently in all three categories. So,
in actuality, there are only five companies qualified in all three of these areas together. Lockheed
Martin is the largest US defense contractor and Boeing comes in second for the year 2000. Raytheon
is the third largest US defense contractor in 2000, Northrop Grumman came in fifth but after
acquiring Litton (which was number six) it would be in fourth place, and TRW is eighth (but with
Litton combined with Northrop Grumman, TRW would move to seventh). They are also prime
contractors for killer lasers, large radars, sensors, other types of military aircraft, and other forms of
armament.
The prime contracts from the Pentagon to these five corporations are for the year 2000 are
as follows:

Lockheed Martin $15.1 billion
Boeing 12.1 billion
Raytheon 6.3 billion
Northrop Grumman 5.8 billion (after merger with Litton)
TRW 2.0 billion
=========
TOTAL $41.3 billion

These five corporations received half of the $82.5 billion in prime contracts received by the top 100
defense contractors. They received a third of the total $133.2 billion in prime Pentagon contracts
awarded to all companies.
These are the five corporations that are the subject of this paper. Their activities and
behavior, however, are not exclusive. Let us look at how each of them has obtained the position it
now holds.

1. Lockheed Martin.

A boyhood ambition was fulfilled when Allan Loughead lifted his Model-G hydro-airplane
from the surface of San Francisco Bay in 1913. He and his brother, Malcolm, later changed their
name and formed Lockheed Aircraft Company. This company was purchased by Robert and
Courtland Gross during the 1930s, and furnished fighters and bombers for the Army Air Corps during
World War II. Expansion continued after the war to include the missiles and space division in
Sunnyvale, California.
With the demise of the cold war, Lockheed combined with a Russian company to form
Lockheed-Khrunichev-Energia International in 1992, thus allowing Lockheed to sell commercial
launch services on Russia's Proton rockets.

Page 4 of PLRC-010603

Lockheed also acquired Sanders Associates in 1992, a large military electronics firm in
Nashua, New Hampshire.
In 1993 Lockheed bought General Dynamics' Fort Worth Division for $1.5 billion, and
became the builder of F-16 fighter jets.
Fulfilling a boyhood dream, Glenn L. Martin in 1909 took to the air near Santa Anna,
California in his home-made airplane. Although too late for World War I, the Martin bombers and
flying boats played a key role in World War II. Later Martin Company merged to create the Martin
Marietta Corporation. In 1993 Martin Marietta purchased General Electric's aerospace business.
(GE had previously swallowed RCA's satellite business.) In 1994 Martin Marietta acquired General
Dynamics' Space Systems Division. On 12 March 1995 the merger of Lockheed and Martin Marietta
was completed to form the new Lockheed Martin Corporation.

That was not the end of business ambitions. On 8 January 1996 Lockheed Martin announced
that it had clinched a $9.1-billion deal to absorb all of Loral Corporation, except for its Space
Systems as described above. The acquisition was approved by federal regulators on 18 April 1996.
On 3 July 1997 Lockheed Martin announced that it was buying Northrop Grumman Corp.
That merger was not supported by the Pentagon and was challenged by the US Justice Department.
The deal was scrapped on 16 July 1998. One of the main reasons was that Northrop Grumman is
moving rapidly to the forefront in ground and airborne surveillance and the merger would have put
too many capabilities under one roof. Had it gone through it would have put under the title of
Lockheed Martin what were once 22 separate companies who competed to make free enterprise work
in America. As it is, those 22 companies have now been reduced to two.

According to Defense News, it appears that Lockheed Martin may now be trying to obtain
the remainder of Loral Corporation -- Space Systems/Loral -- which it had to spin off as an
independent company in 1996. 3 Alcatel, which holds a 20-percent interest in Space Systems/Loral,
filed suit against Loral in a New York US District Court on 16 March 2001 for breaking its 1997
agreement not to discuss the sale or merger of Space Systems/Loral with Lockheed Martin. Alcatel
contends that Loral broke that agreement. Lockheed Martin and Space Systems/Loral have no
comment.

Lockheed Martin has also formed alliances and joint ventures with foreign companies and
governments. Lockheed Martin UK, a registered British company located in Portsmouth, England,
is a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin (Bethesda, Maryland). Lockheed Martin Australia Pty. Ltd. is an
Australian company involved with radar which lies at the heart of Australia's long-term defense
strategy. Lockheed Martin and Rafael (Haifa, Israel) each own 50% interest in Precision Guided
Systems US (PGSUS) located at Orlando, Florida. Lockheed Martin and Elbit Systems Ltd. (Haifa,
Israel) were in January 1998 making plans to do joint business. Lockheed Martin's Aeronautical
Sector formed a long-term alliance with IBM (Armonk, New York) and Dassault Systemes
(Suresnes, France) to design computer-based aircraft development tools and processes that allow
engineers to simulate the spectrum of airplane design before actually creating parts, tools and
processes. Lockheed Martin Space Systems has formed a joint venture with Russia's Intersputnik
communications network, (which owns 15 prime high-altitude slots for satellite deployment) to
strengthen its competitive position in marketing communications satellites globally. Lockheed Martin

Page 5 of PLRC-010603

also has an office in Geneva, Switzerland, called Lockheed Martin International S.A., which is the
spearhead to grab as much as possible of the new business market in eastern Europe.
Lockheed Martin has also built for China a surveillance system , called a Vessel Traffic
Management Information System, which can detect and track surface ships. It is installed on Hainan
Island off the coast of mainland China (of recent media attention regarding the EP-3 spy plane
incident).

2. Boeing.

William Boeing moved to Seattle in 1908 and bought Heath’s shipyard in 1910. This was
later to become his first airplane factory. The Boeing Airplane Company built B-17 and B-29
bombers during World War II. After the war the company built B-47 and B-52 bombers as well as
other military and commercial aircraft and helicopters. Later Boeing entered the field on cruise
missiles, rockets, and space vehicles.
On 6 December 1996 Boeing acquired Rockwell International Corporation’s Space and
Defense Units. The history behind this merger started when North American Aviation, Inc. was
founded on 6 December 1928. On 7 November 1955 it established four separate divisions:
Rocketdyne, Atomics International, Missile Development, and Autonetics. On 22 September 1967
North American Aviation Inc. merged with Rockwell Standard Corporation to become North
American Rockwell. The name was again changed to Rockwell International in February 1973 when
Collins Radio joined the corporation. When Rockwell International’s space and defense units were
purchased by Boeing they were renamed Boeing North American which is a wholly owned subsidiary
of Boeing..
Boeing bought McDonnell Douglass Corporation on 1 August 1997. Donald W. Douglas and
David R. Davis formed the David Douglass Company on 22 July 1920. Donald Douglas incorporated
it as The Douglas Company in July 1921. On 6 July 1939 James S. McDonnell incorporated
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation at Lambert Field, Missouri to produce plexiglass aircraft canopies.
The Douglass and McDonnell Companies merged on 28 April 1967 to become McDonnell Douglas
Corporation. On 6 January 1984 Hughes Helicopters Inc. joined the McDonnell Douglas
Corporation. Now all of these are part of Boeing.
In October 2000 Boeing took control of Hughes Electronics Corporation’s Space and
Communications Company.
Boeing also has international connections. Boeing, Russia, and Ukraine are partners on a sea-based
satellite-launching program called Sea Launch -- using a converted offshore drilling platform
near the equator. Boeing and Russia are the primary partners in the International Space Station.
Boeing on 13 April 2001 signed a partnership deal with the Russian Space Agency that could lead
to billions of dollars in business and enhance Boeing’s presence in the European market. Boeing
currently has a research center in Moscow with over 500 technicians in seven Russian cities.

3. Raytheon.

Laurence K. Marshall, Vannevar Bush, and Charles G. Smith founded The American
Appliance Company in 1922. In 1925 they marketed the first gaseous rectifier tube for radios under
the brand name of Raytheon. In that same year they changed the name of the company to Raytheon
Manufacturing Company.?Page 6 of PLRC-010603
During the 1990s Raytheon sold many of its “non-core” businesses, apparently to focus on
the more lucrative military contracts. Those businesses included the D.C. Heath educational
publishing unit; home appliances; heating and air conditioning; and its Semiconductor, Switchcraft,
Seiscor Technologies. In 2000 it completed the sale of its engineering and construction subsidiary.
But during the 1990s Raytheon also gained other assets which strengthened its position as a
defense contractor. In 1992 it increased its electronics capability by acquiring AMBER Engineering
which designs infrared sensor components and focal plane arrays.
In May 1995, after merging its equipment and missiles divisions, Raytheon acquired E-Systems,
which specializes in intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance systems; command and
control systems; guidance and navigation systems; and control, communications and data systems.
During June 1996, Raytheon acquired Chrysler Corporation’s aircraft modification and
defense electronics businesses and consolidated them into Raytheon E-Systems.
The following year, with megamergers taking place among Pentagon contractors, Raytheon
decided that in order to survive in defense electronics it must adopt a strategy of acquisition and
merger. In July 1997 it acquired Texas Instruments’ Defense Systems and Electronics businesses.
In December 1997 Raytheon took over the remaining defense business of Hughes Electronics
for $9.5 billion -- the largest transaction in Raytheon history. Hughes had previously bought General
Dynamics missile business in 1992.
After the merger with Hughes, Raytheon consolidated all its defense business. In 1999
Raytheon again streamlined its defense and government operations.
Raytheon also has foreign involvement. It owns Raytheon Systems Limited which operates
in the United Kingdom. Raytheon has also teamed up in a 50-50 joint venture with France’s Thales
Group for a European radar and air-defense system.

4. Northrop Grumman.

Jack Northrop started his first company during the 1920s but it was acquired in 1929 by
Boeing-owned United Aircraft and Transport Corporation. Northrop stayed with the Boeing group
until 1932, at which time he convinced Donald Douglas to provide 51% financing for a new Northrop
Corporation. In 1937 that company was dissolved and in 1939 Jack Northrop founded and
incorporated Northrop Aircraft Company.
Grumman Engineering Corporation was founded at Baldwin, Long Island in 1929 to build
floats for Navy scouting planes. In 1932 it became Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation and
moved o Bethpage, Long Island in 1937. It merged with Northrop Aircraft Company in 1994 to form
the present Northrop Grumman Corporation.
Logicon Inc., founded in 1961, is a leader in advanced information technology with expertise
in command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. It
is now a subsidiary of of Northrop Grumman.
Westinghouse Radio Division was incorporated in 1938. Northrop Grumman in March 1996
acquired Westinghouse Electric Corporation’s defense electronics and systems businesses.
In 1997-1998 Northrop Grumman attempted to merge with Lockheed Martin -- described
above. That venture was doomed to failure.
In December 2000, Northrop Grumman announced intentions to acquire Litton Industries for
$5.1 billion. Among all its other activities, Litton owns Ingalls Shipbuilding which builds Aegis

Page 7 of PLRC-010603

cruisers and destroyers and is in the alliance for the new DD-21 destroyer. In early April 2001 the
company announced that it had received all regulatory approvals and that the $3.8-billion deal was
complete. This merger takes Northrop Grumman out of the weapons systems subcontracting role
and makes it a real contender as a systems integrator. A systems integrator is responsible for the
design, development, testing, integration, and support of a weapons system; and may pick several
subcontractors to produce the individual elements of the system. The merger also put Northrop
Grumman in a leading position for ground and airborne surveillance systems. Whereas this company
is now one of the three key contractors for military fighter aircraft, it is fast moving into the space
and missile field as well as shipbuilding.
On 20 April 2001 Northrop Grumman announced that it will acquire Aerojet-General Corp’s
Electronic and Information Systems Group for $315 million. This group, which specializes in space-based
sensing and smart weapons technology, will become part of Northrop Grumman’s Electronic
Sensor and Systems Section (Baltimore, Maryland).
Currently Northrop Grumman is bidding against General Dynamics to acquire Newport News
Shipbuilding. Newport News is the only company besides the Electric Boat Division of General
Dynamics that builds nuclear-powered submarines. It is also the sole producer of aircraft carriers.
Northrop Grumman has a presence in Australia, Belgium, Canada, China, Egypt, England,
France, Ireland, Japan, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and the United Kingdom.

5. TRW.

TRW describes itself as a global technology, manufacturing and service company with
customers in 35 countries. Thompson Products was founded in Cleveland in 1901 to manufacture
screws and fasteners. In 1958 it entered the electronics and defense markets by merging with Los
Angeles-based Ramo-Wooldridge Corporation. The combined company was then known as
Thompson Ramo Wooldridge, or TRW. For the next three decades it acquired businesses with long-term
growth potential. Many of the acquisitions were to support its automotive division. For the
purposes of this paper I will from here on discuss only TRW’s electronics and defense activity.
Between 1991 and 1993 TRW restructured its company to “divest non-strategic and under-performing
assets and to streamline its core businesses.”4

In December 1997 TRW paid almost $1 billion for BDM International Inc. which was a leader
in information system integration and system management.

On 18 January 1999 TRW completed acquisition of Astro Aerospace Corp. TRW Astro
Aerospace (Carpenteria, California) is now a wholly owned subsidiary of TRW Space & Electronics
Group.

In May 1999 TRW completed a $7 billion acquisition of Lucas Varity plc (Britain). Although
much of this merger enhanced TRW’s automotive business, it also enhanced the technological
capabilities and customer base of its aerospace and information systems operations. Lucas Varity had
previously acquired Lucas Aerospace Ltd., which is now known as TRW Aeronautical Systems.
On 14 June 1999 TRW Aeronautical Systems’ Lucas Aerospace acquired Peugeot Citroen’s
SAMM (France), a high-technology flight systems supplier. Besides boosting TRW to the No. 1
market position for flight control actuation, this also improves TRW’s presence in Europe.

Page 8 of PLRC-010603

On 24 August 1999 TRW Aeronautical Systems’ Lucas Aerospace acquired Pierburg
Luftfahrtgerate Union GmbH (Germany). This enforced TRW’s position as a leading aerospace
engine systems supplier.

By the first quarter of 2000 TRW had increased its technology base through equity positions
in RF Micro Devices, Endwave Corporation, Astrolink, Wireless Inc., E-Certify, E-Synch, MultiLink
Technology, iSky, VCI, and Celera. Meanwhile, the company continued to divest its non-core
automotive businesses.

To enhance its laser capabilities TRW in October 2000 purchased Cutting Edge Optronics (St.
Louis, Missouri) for $19 million. Cutting Edge Optronics is a designer and manufacturer of solid-state
lasers, related components, and laser diodes.

FROM MONOPOLY TO CONSPIRACY: TEAMING UP TO SQUEEZE OUT COMPETITION

Mergers in the military contracting field have just about saturated the Federal Trade
Commission’s ability to accommodate. I have noticed that new methods are now undergoing
experimentation -- methods that allow companies to form alliances in ways that reap the greatest
profits. It has not been uncommon in the past for groups of companies to form teams when bidding
on a contract, with the winning team getting the award. Now, however, this teaming up seems to
have taken a new twist -- forming only one team thereby eliminating competition.

With only these five companies dominating three of the most lucrative categories of weapons
manufacture, it would seem that they should be satisfied. But perhaps the failure of Lockheed Martin
being able to merge with Northrop Grumman was an indicator that conglomeration has reached its
saturation point. Big corporations now seem to have devised a system of alliances which give each
company an out-and-out monopoly for a certain piece of the pie. This new system provides all the
advantages of teaming up while at the same time avoiding the lower profits caused by bidding against
each other. Here are a few contracts that have recently come to my attention. I will add more as I
learn about them.

1. The Advanced EHF Satellite.

The Advanced Extreme High Frequency (EHF) Satellite contract award is the first program
that came to my attention in which big corporations corner a section of the development and
manufacturing areas without competition. It seems that if they can’t conglomerate, they can
specialize in areas that monopolize a discrete part of the whole. The Advanced EHF satellite team
epitomizes this behavior.
The Advanced EHF satellite is a follow-on to the existing Military Strategic and Tactical
Relay (MILSTAR) communications satellite. Three companies -- Lockheed Martin, TRW, and
Boeing -- are currently teamed on the MILSTAR project. Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor
that makes the satellite as well as the vehicles to put it into orbit. TRW provides the low-data-rate
payload and Boeing makes the medium-data-rate payload.
Now the Advanced EHF satellite is entering the picture as MILSTAR’s replacement. The
Pentagon wanted some semblance of competitive bidding so, in September 1999, Lockheed Martin
(teamed with TRW) and Boeing were each awarded a $22-million, 18-month study contract to define
the Advanced EHF system. The winner would become prime contractor.

Page 9 of PLRC-010603

Competition was not to happen. The study was not even half over when the three companies
involved convinced the Pentagon that the Advanced EHF could be obtained 18 months sooner if they
worked as a team and the Pentagon waived competitive bidding. Despite some internal dissension,
the Pentagon canceled the competitive studies and awarded the $2.5-billion prime contract to
Lockheed Martin. TRW and Boeing would be subcontractors for major subsystems. Lockheed
Martin expects to receive $825 million over ten years and the balance would go to TRW and Boeing
along with a string on minor subcontractors and vendors. So we now have the same trio that
produced MILSTAR lined up to build Advanced EHF. Predictably, as with most government
contracts, it has been announced that the Advanced EHF program is six months behind schedule. But
the penalty for that probably has less effect on profits than competitive bidding would have.
In essence, although each partner could build a satellite alone, they each choose to only build
an isolated part rather than undercut their profits by having to undercut a competitor. When this trio
team up there are no other qualified competitors -- conglomeration has already eliminated them. This
effectively gives each member a monopoly in building its specific part. All of this may (or may not??)
be according to the letter of anti-monopoly law, but it certainly violates the intention to prevent
monopolies.

2. The US-Israeli Arrow Contest.

For many years the US has been providing most of the funding to help Israel develop the
Arrow anti-tactical missile. Now that Arrow is deployed, the Israelis want to sell it to other countries
such as Turkey, India, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. The US has approved this move providing
the missiles are produced in the US -- Israel can produce the launcher, radar, and other components
of the deployed system.

Arrow’s prime contractor in Israel is Israeli Aircraft Industries Ltd. (IAI), which operates
under the supervision of the Israeli Ministry of Defense. In September 2000, IAI opened competitive
bidding among Boeing Company’s Seal Beach, California division, General Dynamics Corp. (Falls
Church, Virginia), and Raytheon Co. (Lexington, Massachusetts) for production rights of at least
51% of Arrow missiles. Lockheed Martin (Bethesda, Maryland) was essentially eliminated from the
competition because IAI was concerned that the company could not devote proper attention to
Arrow, considering its obligations to so many other high profile ballistic missile defense projects.
First General Dynamics dropped out. Then in mid-November 2000 Raytheon bowed out of
the race for production rights, opting instead to be a subcontractor to Boeing. That left Boeing as
the winner without a struggle. IAI then began scrambling to bring Lockheed Martin back into the
competition in order to preserve some semblance of competitive bidding.

In this case, what appeared to be another attempt to build a weapons system without
competitive bid hit a snag. The US government became concerned over potential transfer of sensitive
technology that would violate the Missile Technology Control Regime. So on 24 January 2001
Boeing announced that it was also suspending negotiations on co-producing Arrow. The outcome
of this example still remains to be seen. Loopholes in the Missile Technology Control Regime are
being sought.

Page 10 of PLRC-010603

3. Low Orbit Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS-Low).

SBIRS-Low is part of the satellite-based early warning and tracking network for ballistic
missile defense (BMD). It is planned as a constellation of about 24 low orbit satellites to track
missiles and warheads midcourse in their flight, and to discriminate between actual warheads and
decoys.

On 16 August 1999 the US Air Force awarded two teams -- one led by TRW Space and
Electronics Group and the other by Spectrum Astro -- a $275-million competitive contract each to
define the SBIRS-low concept. In 2001 Spectrum Astro (Gilbert Arizona) was chosen as prime
contractor for the system which is scheduled to start launching in 2006 and have all the satellites in
orbit by 2011. Spectrum Astro has Northrop Grumman Corporations Electronic Sensors And
Systems Sector (Los Angeles, California) as its main partner. Spectrum Astro leads overall design
effort and is responsible for the spacecraft and overall systems architecture. Northrop Grumman is
responsible for the sensor design and related ground systems data processing, and the ground segment
integration. Analex Corporation, and the Space Dynamics Laboratory of Utah State University are
also on this “Mission Integrated Product Team.” A production contract could range up to $5 billion.
The Air Force intends to spend $11.8 billion on SBIRS-Low over its lifetime through fiscal year
2022.

It began to look as though some new blood would have a major satellite contract but in March
2001 it was announced that the two heavyweights in spacecraft manufacture would be brought onto
the team. Lockheed Martin Space Systems was added to develop algorithms and key aspects of the
ground segment. Boeing’s Missile Defense And Space Control Division (California) was brought
aboard to develop sensors and associated algorithms. According to John Chino, vice president of
Northrop Grumman: “Large team members such as Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and
Boeing bring years of experience and proven technology to the SBIRS-Low program.”5 This
program bears watching as it introduces some interesting speculation on Spectrum Astro’s role in the
original bidding, and who might have been that company’s technical advisors.

MAJOR PROGRAMS CONTRIBUTING TO A U.S. FIRST-STRIKE CAPABILITY

At this point I would like to show how the corporations being discussed are contributing to
the five elements of a first-strike capability. I will address them element by element.

1. Anti-Satellite Warfare (ASAT).

There is currently only one program to my knowledge that is specifically labeled anti-satellite.
It is the Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite (KE-ASAT) interceptor. Remember, however, that most if not
all of the Ballistic Missile Defense programs shown below are also applicable to destroying satellites.
KE-ASAT. Boeing.

2. Precision Nuclear Delivery Vehicles.

These are the strategic weapons that would destroy an opponents land-based weapons and
command posts, as well as other critical targets. Although some heavy bombers (B-52s and B-2s)
are in this arsenal, the main first strike weapons are submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs)
and silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

Page 11 of PLRC-010603

B-2 Bomber Northrop Grumman.
B-52 Bomber Boeing.
Nuclear ALCM Boeing.
Minuteman-3 ICBMs. Boeing: Manufacturer
TRW, Boeing, Lockheed Martin: ICBM Integration Team
MX ICBMs (Peacekeeper) Boeing: Manufacturer
TRW, Boeing, Lockheed Martin: ICBM Integration Team
Northrop Grumman: LN-195 Alternate Inertial Guidance System
Trident SLBMs Lockheed Martin: Overall contractor
Northrop Grumman: Missile launching systems
Nuclear Tomahawk Raytheon.

3. Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW).

A good portion of ASW platforms (ships and submarines) are not being covered in this paper
and are not produced by the corporations addressed in this paper.
P-3C Maritime Patrol Aircraft Lockheed Martin: Manufacturer
Raytheon and Lockheed Martin: Modifications
S-3A ASW Carrier-Based Aircraft Lockheed Martin: Manufacturer
Raytheon and Lockheed Martin: Modifications
Mark-46, Mark-48 and Mark-50 Torpedoes Raytheon
Surface Sensors Upgrades Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and
Raytheon
Subsurface Sensor Upgrades Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Boeing
Dipping Sonar for ASW Helicopters Raytheon
AN/AQS-14 Side-Looking Dipping Sonar Northrop Grumman
Airborne Low Frequency Sonar 6 Raytheon
AN/SQS-56(I)/DE1160(I) Sonar System Raytheon
Undersea Warfare Systems 7 Lockheed Martin
Ocean Surface Warfare Systems 8 Lockheed Martin
Undersea Coastal Surveillance System 9 Raytheon

4. Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD).

BMD has been in the limelight for some time and is even more so at present. I will try to
group the technologies in some sensible order below.

Page 12 of PLRC-010603

a. Lower Tier Theater Missile Defense (TMD).
Patriot PAC-3 System Lockheed Martin: Interceptor
Raytheon: Launcher and Fire Control
Boeing: Warhead Seeker (sensor)
Navy Area Defense System Raytheon: SM-2 Block-4A interceptor
Raytheon: AN/SPY-1 Radar and Fire Control
Lockheed Martin: Aegis System Software
Medium Extended Air Defense System Lockheed Martin: PAC-3 Interceptor
(Other contractors are German and Italian)

b. Upper Tier Theater Missile Defense (TMD).
Theater High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Lockheed Martin: Interceptor
Boeing: Kill Vehicle
Northrop Grumman: Infrared Focal Planes
Northrop Grumman: Battle Control Station
Raytheon: TMD/GBR X-band Radar
Navy Theater Wide System Raytheon: Standard-3 Interceptor
Boeing and Raytheon: LEAP Kill Vehicle
Raytheon: AN/SPY-1 Radar and Fire Control
Lockheed Martin: Aegis System Software
Single Integrated Air Picture Raytheon and Lockheed Martin: Cooperative
Engagement Capability

c. National Missile Defense (NMD).
Prime Contractor/Systems Integrator Boeing
Ground-Based Interceptor Boeing: Booster Stack
Raytheon: Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle
Lockheed Martin: Surrogate Test Booster
Ballistic Missile Early Warning Radars Raytheon (5 large phased array radars)
X-Band Tracking Radars Raytheon.
Battle Management Command, Control and Communications System TRW

d. Killer Lasers.
Airborne Laser (ABL) Boeing: Aircraft and integration with laser
Boeing: Battle Management System Software
TRW: Chemical Oxygen Iodide Laser
Lockheed Martin: Sensors and Beam Control
Space Based Laser (SBL) TRW, Lockheed Martin, Boeing:Team SBL
US-Israel Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) TRW: US contractor (Others are Israeli.)

e. Space-Based Sensors.
Defense Support (existing early warning) Satellite TRW
High-Orbit Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS-High) Lockheed Martin: Team leader
Northrop Grumman: Infrared sensors
(Honeywell is also on team)
Low-Orbit Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS-Low) Spectrum Astro is prime contractor.
Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and
Boeing are on team.

Page 13 of PLRC-010603

f. NATO BMD Defense.
Competing Team No. 1: Lockheed Martin, TRW, and European companies.
Competing Team No.2: Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and European companies.

5. Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (C3I).

Many C3I programs that pertain to specific first-strike elements are discussed above under
those specific elements, such as certain radars and satellite sensors. Those listed here are others I
believe contribute significantly to a US first-strike capability although they may have other uses. This
list does not by any means exhaust the complete range of C3I programs, but the contractors involved
would be similar.
Military Strategic and Tactical Relay (MILSTAR) communications satellite.
Lockheed Martin: Prime Contractor
TRW: Low Data Rate Payload
Boeing: Medium Data Rate Payload
Navigation System Timing And Ranging (NAVSTAR) Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite.
Lockheed Martin: Block-2R
Boeing: Block-2F
Wide Area Augmentation System to enhance GPS Raytheon
E-3 Airborne Warning And Control Systems (AWACS) aircraft.
Boeing: Aircraft
Northrop Grumman: Radar
E-4B Advanced Airborne Command Post Boeing
E-6 TACAMO Communications Aircraft Boeing
E-8 Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) aircraft.
Northrop Grumman: Systems Integrator
Boeing: Aircraft
Northrop Grumman: Radar

MAJOR PROGRAMS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO REGIONAL WARS

The following are some of the major weapons systems used to fight regional wars. This list
is not comprehensive and does not include systems or weapons listed above.

1. Satellites.

Ground-Based Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance System (GEODSS) TRW
Defense Satellite Communications System (DSCS) Lockheed Martin
Fleet Satellite Communications System (FLTSATCOM) TRW
UHF Follow-On Communications Satellite (Follow-on to FLTSATCOM) Boeing
Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) Lockheed Martin
DMSP Weather imagery sensors by Northrop Grumman
Keyhole Spy Satellites Lockheed Martin

2. Airplanes, Helicopters and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.

B-1 Bomber Boeing
B-2 Bomber (conventional role) Northrop Grumman
B-52 Bomber (conventional role) Boeing
Northrop Grumman: electronic countermeasures.
C-2 Navy Cargo/Transport Aircraft Northrop Grumman
C-17 Transport/Cargo Aircraft Boeing
C-40A Military Transport Aircraft Boeing

Page 14 of PLRC-010603

KC-10 Tanker/Cargo Aircraft Boeing
KC-135 Stratotanker Boeing
RC-135 Surveillance Aircraft Boeing
E-2C Navy Early Warning Command &Control Northrop Grumman
EP-3 Electronic Surveillance Aircraft Lockheed Martin: Aircraft
Raytheon and Lockheed Martin: Modifications
ES-3 Electronic Surveillance Aircraft Lockheed Martin: Aircraft
Raytheon and Lockheed Martin: Modifications
EA-6B Navy Electronic Countermeasures Airc’ft Northrop Grumman
RC-7B Army Reconnaissance Aircraft Northrop Grumman
U-2 Spy Plane Lockheed Martin
F-4 Fighter Aircraft Boeing
Northrop Grumman: Electronic Countermeasures
F-5 Navy Fighter Aircraft Northrop Grumman
F-14 Strike Fighter Northrop Grumman
Raytheon: Radar and Weapon Control Systems 10
Lockheed Martin: Infrared Search & Track System
F-15 Fighter Aircraft Boeing
Northrop Grumman: electronic countermeasures and
LR-500 Passive Direction Finding System
F-16 Fighter Aircraft Lockheed Martin.
Northrop Grumman: radar/targeting/navigation and
electronic countermeasures/jammer.
F/A-18 Strike Fighter/Attack Aircraft Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon: Aircraft
Lockheed Martin: Nite Hawk Infrared Targeting Syst.
F-117 Stealth Fighter Lockheed Martin
AV-8 Harrier Short Take Off/Landing Aircraft Boeing
AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopter Boeing
Lockheed Martin & Northrop Grumman: Targeting
& Navigation, Electro-Optical, & Longbow Systems.
CH-46/UH-46 Helicopters Boeing
CH-47/MH-47 Helicopters Boeing
Uninhabited Combat Air Vehicle Lockheed Martin
Fire Scout Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Northrop Grumman
RQ-4A Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Northrop Grumman
Predator Tank Killer UAV Lockheed Martin
Northrop Grumman provides surveillance radar.
Hunter UAV TRW

3. Missiles, Rockets, and Missile Systems.

Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM) Boeing
Tomahawk Conventional Land-Attack Cruise Missile Raytheon
SM-2 Land-Attack/Anti-Ship Standard Missiles Raytheon
Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) Lockheed Martin
Navy Tactical Missile System (NTACMS) Lockheed Martin
High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) Lockheed Martin
Multiple-Launch Rocket System (MLRS) Lockheed Martin
Rolling Airframe Missile for ship defense Raytheon

Page 15 of PLRC-010603

Advanced Unitary Penetrator Missile for hard targets Lockheed Martin
BLU-109 Missile for hard targets Lockheed Martin
HAVE LITE Precision-Guided Air-to-Ground Missile Lockheed Martin
Paveway Laser-Guided Bomb Raytheon
Harpoon Missile and its derivatives 11 Boeing
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) Lockheed Martin
Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser 12 Lockheed Martin
AGM-65 Maverick Missile Raytheon
AGM-88 High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile for radar Raytheon
AGM-130 Standoff Missile Boeing
AGM-142 Precision-Guided Air-To-Ground Missile Lockheed Martin
AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW)13 Raytheon
AIM-9 and AIM-9X Sidewinder Missiles Raytheon
AIM-54 Phoenix Missile Raytheon
AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM) Raytheon
AIM/RIM-7P Sparrow Air-to-Air Missile Raytheon
GBU-15 Modular Guided Weapons System 14 Boeing
Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)15 Boeing: Team Leader
Lockheed Martin: On team
Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile Raytheon
Python-4 Air-to-Air Missile Lockheed Martin
Starstreak Air-to-Air Missile Lockheed Martin
Hawk Air Defense Missile Raytheon
HUMRAAM Advanced Air Defense Guided Missile System Raytheon
SEA RAM Anti-Ship Missile Defense System Raytheon
Excaliber Precision-Guided Extended-Range Artillery Projectile Raytheon
Extended-Range Guided Munition for Navy/Army artillery Raytheon
Enhanced Fiber Optic Guided Missile Raytheon
Brimstone “fire and forget” anti-tank missile Boeing
Hellfire II Anti-Armor Missile Lockheed Martin
Javelin Shoulder-Fired Anti-Armor Missile Lockheed Martin and Raytheon
Stinger Shoulder-Fired Fire-and-Forget Missile Raytheon
Line-Of-Site Anti-Armor (LOSAT) Weapon Lockheed Martin
Tube-launched, Optically-tracked, Wire-guided (TOW) Missile Raytheon
Tube-launched, Optically engaged, Wireless Fire & Forget (TOW-FF) Raytheon
MPIM/SRAW anti-armor/anti-bunker weapon Lockheed Martin
Precision-Guided Mortar Munition (PGMM) Lockheed Martin

Page 16 of PLRC-010603

Brilliant Anti-Armor (BAT) Submunition Raytheon
Northrop Grumman: dual mode target seeker.
Low-Cost Autonomous Attack Smart Submunition Lockheed Martin
Ship Self-Defense System Raytheon

4. Sensors, Battle Management and Navigation.

Airborne Battlefield Command & Control Center Lockheed Martin
Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below TRW
Search/Reconnaissance Radars for Aircraft 16 Raytheon
Target Sight System for the AH-1Z Cobra Helicopter Lockheed Martin
AN/AAR-58 Missile Warning System for Aircraft Raytheon
AN/ALP-73 Passive Detection System for aircraft Northrop Grumman
AN/ALP-125 Tactical Electronic Reconnaissance System for aircraft Northrop Grumman
AN/BLD-1 Precision Direction Finding System for attack subs Northrop Grumman
LR-100 Warning & Surveillance Receiver for UAVs and others Northrop Grumman
Instantaneous Frequency Measurement Unit for spacecraft use Northrop Grumman
Fiber Optic and Advanced Inertial Guidance Systems Northrop Grumman
Precision Targeting and Attack Systems 17 Lockheed Martin
Mobile and Airborne Radars 18 Lockheed Martin
Aircraft Radars 19 Raytheon
AN/AAQ-16(3FOV) Helicopter Infrared Sensing System Raytheon
AN/AAS-44(V) Infrared Detecting/Ranging/Tracking Set 20 Raytheon
Infrared Electro Optical Systems Northrop Grumman
Bradley Fighting Vehicle Acquisition System Raytheon
Laser Designators for Airborne Vehicles 21 Northrop Grumman
Laser Sight for Armored Vehicles Northrop Grumman
Man-portable Laser Sights/Designators Northrop Grumman
Imaging Cameras for small satellites Northrop Grumman
Nationwide Aircraft Defense System Northrop Grumman
Guardrail/Common Sensor for wide area coverage TRW
Electronic Countermeasures for A-10 and F-111 aircraft Northrop Grumman
Vision, Targeting & Firing Sensors for Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) Raytheon

Page 17 of PLRC-010603

5. Land Systems.

M109A6 Paladin self-propelled howitzer TRW: Electronic System Technical Support
M992 Field Artillery Ammunition Supply Vehicles TRW: Electronic System Technical Support

6. Sea Systems.

Manufacture Aegis Cruisers and Destroyers Northrop Grumman
Ship & Submarine Overhaul/Repair/Modernization/Conversion Northrop Grumman
Advanced SEAL Team Delivery System Northrop Grumman
Submarine Propulsion and Power Generation Machinery Northrop Grumman
Wasp-Class Amphibious Ships Northrop Grumman

7. Miscellaneous.

Numerous Cannons and a Machine Gun 22 Boeing
Phalanx Close-In Weapons System (20 MM gatling type) Raytheon
Night Vision Goggles and other Equipment Northrop Grumman

MAJOR WEAPONS PROGRAMS IN DEVELOPMENT

The following are some of the major weapons systems that are in development and have not
been mentioned previously. The list is not comprehensive.
Navigation System Timing And Ranging (NAVSTAR) Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite.
Lockheed Martin and Boeing competing for Block-3
Advanced EHF Satellite Lockheed Martin is prime contractor.
TRW and Boeing are major subcontractors.
Wideband Gapfiller Communications Satellite 23 Boeing
Future Imagery Architecture 24 Boeing
Raytheon, Eastman Kodak and Harris Corp. also.
Terminator infrared targeting syst. for F/A-18E/F Raytheon
Moving Surface Target Engagement Capability Northrop Grumman
Joint Strike Fighter Boeing and Lockheed Martin competing.
Northrop Grumman is on Lockheed Martin team.
F-22 Stealth Fighter Aircraft Boeing and Lockheed Martin
Northrop Grumman provides radar.
Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft Boeing and Northrop Grumman have study contracts
RAH-66 Comanche Reconnaissance Helicopter Boeing is leader of Boeing- Sikorsky team.
Lockheed Martin, TRW, and Northrop Grumman
are on the team..
V-22 Osprey Boeing teamed with Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.
Extended Range Guided Munition (ERGM) Raytheon

Page 18 of PLRC-010603

Tactical Tomahawk Raytheon
Lockheed Martin is modifying electronic control syst.
Fasthawk supersonic cruise missile Boeing has concept definition and demo. contract.
Lockheed Martin developing supersonic solid-fuel
ramjet engine.
DD-21 Land-Attack Destroyer Lockheed Martin systems integrator of blue team.
(General Dynamics leads blue team.)
Raytheon systems integrator of gold team.
Northrop Grumman leads gold team.
Boeing is a member of the gold team.
Litening II Targeting Pod for night/bad weather Northrop Grumman
AAR-54(V) Missile Approach Warning System Northrop Grumman
Space-based Radar Surveillance Systems Northrop Grumman
CNI antenna designs for new aircraft and ships TRW
Solid State Laser Technology TRW

WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM THE GOVERNMENT

It is my belief that most elected government officials were put in office by Big Money and,
therefore, their main focus is to enhance the interests of their constituents -- those with Big Money.
When in office they appoint and confirm other officials who will pursue the same goal. If my
hypothesis is true, then the government will, among other things, work toward enhancing the profits
of weapons manufacturers. Following are some events which support my hypothesis:

1. Weapons Contractors To Be Relieved Of Research And Development Costs.

Today there are many ways the Pentagon uses to encourage or compel manufacturers to pay
part of the research and development (R&D) costs for major weapons systems. Most of this is
written into the contract in such ways as limits on annual R&D funding increments, ceilings on cost-plus
contracts, and awarding development contracts known to be less than actual cost. This is
especially true when contracts are awarded to competing teams, and it is reasonable because in other
industries the manufacturer foots all the R&D cost before a product is sold. Of course the cost of
that product is adjusted so that R&D costs are recovered, but that is also true when a military
contractor bids on the final production contract for a weapons system.
Now, however, the new undersecretary of defense for acquisition, Edward C. Aldridge, has
ordered that the Pentagon stop this practice. One unidentified DOD official stated: “We want our
contractors to earn money on our contracts. We want the industry to be healthy so it can do its best
to perform contracts.”25 This, of course, implies that the conglomerated defense industry is struggling
to make a profit.
Aldridge didn’t waste any time. His16 May 2001 order was issued the fourth day on the job.
It followed a recommendation from a November 2000 study by the Defense Science Board of the
Pentagon entitled “Preserving a Healthy and Competitive U.S. Defense Industry to Ensure Our Future
National Security.”
Edward Aldridge was chief executive officer (CEO) of Aerospace Corporation in Los Angeles
at the time of his Pentagon appointment. He was previously head of McDonnell Douglas Electronic
Systems (now part of Boeing).

Page 19 of PLRC-010603

2. White House Considers Easing Export Controls.

Exports of dual-use-technology -- technology which can be used for military use as well as
civilian -- was previously covered by the Export Administration Act. It expired in 1994 but has been
kept alive with various presidential orders by the Clinton administration. Meanwhile, the Senate has
been debating a new export control act but has not been successful in getting it passed into law
because some senators say the regulations on sensitive material is too lax. Amendments to the
currently debated law would put most of the responsibility on the Commerce Department which
mostly sides with industry and is not as concerned about sensitive technologies as the Pentagon.
Now the Bush administration is planning to issue an executive order that will give the
Pentagon little say in what is exported and thus remove obstacles for exporters. The Pentagon will
only be able to appeal a Commerce Department decision and the new executive order will only
accommodate appeals on a limited number of items. Those appeals would be processed by a panel
with representatives from the Pentagon, the Commerce Department, and the National security
council. It is expected that the Pentagon would be regularly outvoted. Regardless of the various
feeling about whether this will be a good move or bad one, the bottom line is that this upcoming
presidential order will make it much easier for the weapons merchants to turn a profit.
3. Weapons Contractor Executives Appointed To Top Government Posts.

The United States Constitution says there shall be civilian control over the military. Let us
take a peek at how this is being acted out.

New Secretaries of the Navy, Army and Air Force were sworn in on 24 May, 31 May, and
1 June 2001 respectively. A new Undersecretary of the Air Force, newly elevated to the No. 2 spot
in the Air Force, has also been nominated. Here is a run down on each.

Gordon England was executive vice president of General Dynamics, and a 30-year veteran
of the defense and technology industries, when he was tapped for Navy Secretary. General
Dynamics, though not described in the paper, held the position as fourth largest military contractor
for 2000 (until the Northrop Grumman- Litton merger). It was the builder of Trident submarines and
one of the only two companies to build nuclear-powered submarines. England has to sell his
approximately $5.3 million in General Dynamics stock in order to “legally” eliminate a conflict of
interest.

Retired Brigadier General Thomas E. White is the new Army Secretary. Prior to his
appointment, White was vice chairman of Enron Energy Services which is responsible for providing
energy outsource solutions to US commercial and industrial customers.
Before becoming Air Force Secretary, James G. Roche was a 23-year career retired Navy
captain and a president of Northrop Grumman’s Electronic Sensors and Systems Sector. He has been
dubbed the first sailor to lead the Air Force.

For the No. 2 spot, Undersecretary of the Air Force, Lockheed Martin Space Systems
president has been nominated. This job is significant since the Air Force has been designated the

Page 20 of PLRC-010603

executive agent for space. In this position Smith, a veteran of “black budget” programs, will be
responsible for much of the Ballistic Missile defense budget while also directing spy satellite
operations jointly with the CIA.

There may be some strong behind-the-scenes struggling between the Navy and Air Force
secretaries over the auctioning of Newport News Shipbuilding. England’s General Dynamics and
Roche’s Northrop Grumman are both bidding to take over that company. Whichever wins, it will
essentially reduce major shipbuilding to two corporations.

Mike Gerhart, law professor at Virginia’s William and Mary College, observed: “The
Founders [of the U.S. Constitution] had intended civilian control of the military.”26 Yet none of the
senators during confirmation hearings expressed concerns about retired military officers overseeing
the Army and Air Force. Gerhart expressed greater worries about the conflict of interest these new
secretaries will have in performing their jobs. He said: “I’d be very dubious about their judgments.”27
William Hartung of the World Policy Institute was also critical of these appointments. He
noted that the Bush administration seems to be establishing a corporate-style structure in Washington.
“They probably could find some very qualified executives who are not in the defense industry,” he
said. Then he added: “After all, the defense firms don’t have the best reputations for controlling
costs.”28

CONCLUSION

I think the above discussion illustrates that the arms race, missile defense, national security,
or whatever name is used to generate the manufacture of weapons, is driven by the profit imperative
-- high yield for the stockholders and lavish salaries for the workers. It is because of this vast array
of military manufacturing, and the global business adventurism that these weapons protect, that the
“enemy” image must be impressed on Americans. Without the Saddam Husseins and the rogue
nations this behavior could not be justified. Therefore we are kept fearful of threats against which
we must protect ourselves.

Yet the arguments regarding these weapons all seem to focus on technical capabilities,
political impact, international opinion, vital resources, generation of jobs, ad infinitum. These
“practical” arguments have their place but to change the social climate that supports warmaking and
global exploitation we must address the entire spectrum of causes, and particularly the root cause.
Pursuing the “practical” arguments alone is exactly what the weapons merchants and the Pentagon
want. So long as we continue to argue against weapons systems on those grounds we are playing
their game. They are much better prepared to carry on that debate than we are. Thus benevolent

Page 21 of PLRC-010603

change never occurs. And amid all this scramble for the taxpayer’s dollar, the Pentagon contractors
seek ways of turning more of those dollars into profits. This has led to conglomeration and teaming
up to bid on contracts.

Meanwhile, the spirit of free enterprise is virtually dead as small businesses are forced out of
the picture. That is happening in the fields of health care, grocery chains, gasoline suppliers, internet
providers, and most if not all of the other suppliers of goods and services. Yet we revel in our label
of “democracy,” and we celebrate the “freedom” that rings throughout our land. Perhaps we are only
acting out of habit. Perhaps we are deluding ourselves. Perhaps democracy is atrophying and our
freedom is an illusion. I think an old proverb is most pertinent in this case: “You don’t feel the chains
until you try to move.”

1 This by no means covers the gamut of military contracting, and even less so the entire spectrum of
corporate marketing activity. For example, General Dynamics (which owns Electric Boat Corp. and is America’s
4 th largest weapons contractor) is making another attempt to acquire Newport News Shipbuilding (America’s 16 th
largest weapons contractor). If this should happen it would put all submarine construction under one roof.

2 Finnegan.

3 See Defense News, 16 April 2001, p. 2.

4 http://www.trw.com/about/main/1,1015,1_1151^2^1151^1151,00.html

5 Lockheed Martin, Boeing Join SBIRS-Low Team.

6 Also referred to as the AN/AQS-22 System. This is the next generation dipping sonar and sonobuoy
processing system for ASW helicopters. It includes active and passive dipping sonars and the AN/SSQ-36BT, -41B,
-53D, -57B, -62B and -77B active and passive sonobuoys.

7 These include the AN/SQQ-89(V)14 Surface Ship Undersea Warfare Combat System, the HAS-2154
Hull Sonar Array, and the TB-29/BQ Towed Sonar Array.

8 These include the AN/SLY-2(V) Surface Ship Electronic Warfare System and the AN/BLQ-10
Submarine Electronic Warfare System.

9 This involves furnishing upgraded sensors and systems to the Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System.

10 These are the AN/AWG-9 and AN/APG-71 Weapons Control Systems.

11 This includes the Harpoon, Harpoon Block-2, Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM), and the SLAM
Extended Range.

12 Converts CBU-87, -89 and -97 into all-weather precision-guided weapons.

13 3,000 JSOWs are being equipped with bunker-penetrating warheads.

14 The GBU-15 can precisely deliver the Mk-84 2000-lb. general purpose bomb or the BLU-109B 2000-lb.
penetrating bomb.

15 JDAM is a tail section that converts “dumb” free-fall bombs to “smart” weapons. It uses the NAVSTAR
GPS system and can independently target each bomb. It is more advanced than the GBU-15.

16 These include the AN/SPS-73 Surface Search radar, the ARL-M Crazy Hawk, and the ASARS-2 Radar.

17 These include Low-Altitude Navigation & Targeting Infrared for Night (LANTIRN) and Precision
Attack Navigation & Targeting with Extended Range Acquisition (PANTERA), both for fighter aircraft;
Shipboard Infrared Search & Track for sensing anti-cruise missile threats; and Tactical Reconnaissance Armored
Combat Equipment Requirement (TRACER).

18 These include the FPS-117 Mobile Air & Missile Defense Radar, the AN/TPS-59(V)3 Tactical Missile
Defense Radar, the MMSR Mobile 3D S-band Surveillance Radar, the PSTAR Portable Search & Target
Acquisition Radar, the AN/APS-145 Airborne Surveillance Radar, and the AN/APG-67 Multimode Radar.

19 This includes AN/APG-63, -63(V)1, -63(V)2, -65, -70 and -73 radars; AN/APQ-174, -180 and -186
radars; and the AN/APS-137B(V)5 radar system.

20 This system is to target Hellfire missiles from Helicopters.

21 These are used on the Dark Star UAV; the F-117A, F/A-18, F-111, and F-4 aircraft; the SH-60, AH-64,
and Aeroscout helicopters; and LANTIRN.

22 Cannons are: 25mm M242 Bushmaster, 30mm Bushmaster-2 Automatic Cannon, Mk-44 30mm/40mm
Automatic Cannon, 35mm/50mm Bushmaster-3 Cannon, 30mm M230/M230LF Automatic Cannon, and 27mm
aircraft cannon. Machine gun is the 7.62mm EX-34 produced in the United Kingdom for the Ministry of Defence.

23 The Wideband Gapfiller is an interim step to replace the Defense Satellite Communications System
(DSCS) satellite until the Advanced Wideband Communications Satellite comes on line around 2008. Boeing has
a contract for six satellites to be launched between 2004 and 2010.

24 This is a new generation spy satellite system which has also been called Discoverer II. It will be a
massive $25-billion project involving hundreds of subcontractors. Some two dozen satellites are planned over the
next 20-30 years, starting in 2005.

25 Cited in Defense News, 28 June 2001, p. 6.

26 Cited in Newsday, 31 May 2001.

27 Cited in Newsday, 31 May 2001.

28 Cited in Newsday, 31 May 2001.

Boeing web site, http://www.boeing.com,and links.
Defense Link, http://www.defenselink.mil; press conferences, news releases, and contract announcements.
Defense News (6883 Commercial Drive, Springfield, VA 22159-0500), various issues.
Finnegan, Philip; “Consolidation Breeds Government Backlash,” Defense News, 17 February 1997, p. 3.
Lockheed Martin, Boeing Join SBIRS-Low Team, http://defence-data.com/current/page10260.htm , 20 March 2001.
Lockheed Martin web site, http://www.lockheedmartin.com, and links
Mercury News, (San Jose, California), various issues.
Newsday, “Defense Execs Get Top Posts,” 31 Mat 2001.
Northrop Grumman web site, http://www.northgrum.com, and links.
Raytheon web site, http://www.raytheon.com, and links.
TRW web site, http://www.trw.com, and links.

ABL AirBorne Laser
AMRAAM Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile.
ATACMS Army Tactical Missile System.
ASAT Anti SATellite.
ASW Anti-Submarine Warfare.
AWACS Airborne Warning And Command System.
BAT Brilliant Anti-Tank.
BMD Ballistic Missile Defense.
C3I Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence.
CALCM Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile.
CIA Central Intelligence Agency.
CNI Communications, Navigation, Identification.
DOD Department OF Defense.
DSCS Defense Satellite Communications System.
EHF Extreme High Frequency.
ERGM Extended Range Guided Missile.
FLTSATCOM FLeeT SATellite COMmunications.
GE General Electric.
GEODSS Ground-Based Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance System.

Page 22 of PLRC-010603

GPS Global Positioning System.
HIMARS High Mobility Artillery Rocket System.
IAI Israeli Aircraft Industries.
IBM International Business Machines.
ICBM InterContinental Ballistic Missile.
JASSM Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile.
JDAM Joint Direct Attack Munition.
JSOW Joint StandOff Weapon.
JSTARS Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System.
KE-ASAT Kinetic Energy Anti-SATellite interceptor
LANTIRN Low-Altitude Navigation & Targeting Infrared for Night.
LASER Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation.
LASM Land Attack Standoff Missile.
LAV Light Armored Vehicle.
LEAP Light ExoAtmospheric Projectile.
LOSAT Line-Of-Sight Anti-Tank.
MILSTAR MILitary Strategic and Tactical Relay communications satellite.
MLRS Multiple Launch Rocket System.
MPIM/SRAW Multi-Purpose Individual Munition/Short-Range Assault Weapon.
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
NAVSTAR NAVigation System Timing And Ranging.
NMD National Missile Defense.
NTACMS Navy Tactical Missile System.
PAC-3 Patriot Advanced Capability 3.
PANTERA Precision Attack Navigation & Targeting with Extended Range Acquisition.
PGMM Precision-Guided Mortar Munition.
PGSUS Precision Guided Systems U.S.
R&D Research and Development.
RADAR RAdio Detection And Ranging.
RCA Radio Corporation of America.
SBIRS Space-Based Infra Red System.
SBL Space-Based Laser.
SLAM Standoff Land Attack Missile.
SLBM Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile.
SM-2 Standard Missile 2.
SM-3 Standard Missile 3.
SOSUS SOund Surveillance UnderScan, or
SOund SUrveillance System.
TACAMO TAke Charge And Move Out.
THAAD Theater High Altitude Area Defense.
THEL Tactical High Energy Laser.
TMD Theater Missile Defense.
TMD/GBR Theater Missile Defense Ground-Based Radar.
TOW Tube-launched, Optically-tracked, Wire-guided.
TRACER Tactical Reconnaissance Armored Combat Equipment Requirement.
TRW Thompson Ramo Wooldridge
UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.