Three ways Trump can reform U.S. arms sales

OPINION:

On April 9, President Trump signed an executive order to “improve speed and accountability” in the U.S. arms sales system. It was part of a wider package of executive orders intended to reform U.S. defense acquisition.

Mr. Trump is not the first American president to try to reform a foreign arms sales system that is best described as broken. In the late 1990s, President Clinton promised to streamline the foreign military sales process and cut some of the red tape while emphasizing the commercial aspect of the whole enterprise. Presidents and congressional leaders have since sought to reform the foreign military sales and defense acquisition systems. They have made important progress but ultimately have fallen short of holistic change.

With such a long history of challenges, it is understandable why one might receive Mr. Trump’s latest foreign military sales reform initiatives with skepticism. However, we are more optimistic, mainly because we believe key actors are aligned in this administration and Congress to reinvent the way the U.S. conducts international defense trade.

This is a foreign policy priority. Unlike in the 1990s, when the United States could afford to slip up or delay reforms because American economic and military power was undisputed, today we face technology competition around the globe.

The U.S. government built the existing foreign military sales architecture to prioritize control and oversight during a post-Cold War era of government-driven technological innovation, but today’s world demands a system that is faster, more agile and more innovation-friendly.

China is rapidly expanding its military exports with far fewer constraints. As a result, Beijing’s market share in key sectors is growing. If Washington fails to modernize the American defense trade ecosystem, including but not limited to foreign military sales, the U.S. government and U.S. industry will risk losing strategic influence and market share.

Defense trade is not just about selling weapons. It is the wiring diagram for allied interoperability and a vital part of America’s combat credibility. If Washington leaves the defense trade ecosystem as it is while adversaries streamline theirs, the United States could lose the ability to more effectively operate with key allies and woo potential partners.

The April 9 executive order outlines important steps to speed up foreign military sales and improve alignment with the Defense Department’s innovation priorities. However, several foundational challenges — opaque export control regulations, outdated acquisition processes and risk-averse compliance cultures — require a deeper look. Here, we outline three key areas where the administration should do more.

One, the executive order does not do enough to streamline the export control system, including regulations governing implementation of the U.S. Munitions List, which continues to restrict the export of many dual-use technologies based on dated criteria. Instead, the administration should consider mechanisms that require time-bound reviews and updates on the way technologies are categorized. This will ensure that regulation keeps pace with the state of innovation. Without changes, this risk-averse process will continue to default to export license denials and scare off innovators who would be exporters.

Two, the executive order does not take on the persistent barriers in the foreign military sales system for innovative technologies that are not yet formally a part of the acquisition machinery. To ensure that U.S. allies and partners are gaining the most innovative and cost-effective capabilities, particularly through U.S. security cooperation, there must be personnel dedicated to enabling the growing body of defense commercial technology to be sold through foreign military sales and security cooperation packages.

Three, the administration must ensure effective leadership and cultural change in this process. Reforms on the scale required must be driven by a persistent leader with credible experience in foreign military sales, as well as the trust and ear of Mr. Trump. That senior official, ideally sitting in the National Security Council, must drive implementation of the initial executive order directives while focusing on cultural and process changes. He or she will drive policy, but lower-level staff will implement it. The latter requires the administration to properly train and empower the next generation of staffers. Imbuing and incentivizing an entrepreneurial ethos, thus far the exception rather than the norm, will be necessary.

Let’s give credit where it’s due. This is the first administration to take on this gargantuan task so early in office. This moment is ripe with opportunity, with public and private sector leaders focused on driving true reform. The question now is whether the administration will fully seize it. Our ideas should help.

• Natasha Ahmed is a senior adviser with TRENDS US, Jamie Morgan is the founder and principal of Gray Book Consulting, and Bilal Y. Saab is the senior managing director of TRENDS US.