China Sole Manufacturer of Material for U.S. Missiles

97silverlsc

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2004
Messages
953
Reaction score
0
Location
High Bridge, NJ
http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/?Page=Article&ID=7123
It was in his 2003 State of the Union Address that President George W. Bush expressed his administration’s objective to “strengthen global treaties banning the production and shipment of missile technologies.” It was thereafter, between 2003 and 2004, in which the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS) allowed the last manufacturer in the U.S. that provided a key element instrumental in cruise missile guidance, to be relocated to the Peoples’ Republic of China.

During this week’s U.S. visit of China President, Hu Jintao, and his meetings with President Bush and his advisors, it would be apropos to revisit a strategic corporate deal which occurred over a period of several years. With its finality in 2004, the U.S. now remains totally dependent upon China for key rare earth metals and their production necessary in the manufacture of the most crucial of U.S. military warfare.

The CFIUS decision in January 2006, regarding the approval of the Dubai Ports World Company, to take over port operations of the six largest East Coast ports in the U.S., not only raised many U.S. Congressional eyebrows but set off a strew of newly proposed legislation, to include more transparency between CFIUS and the U.S. Congress. But CFIUS has long had a precedent of approving such business transactions, and the ports deal was only the latest of such. As the deal approval became known to the public via AP reporter, Ted Bridis, in February 2006, apparently even he was more in the loop than the lawmakers on Capitol Hill. However, there have been close to 2,000 other deals approved by CFIUS since its inception in 1988, many of which should have involved and concerned the U.S. Congress much sooner.

It is the lack of accountability of the secret CFIUS committee, presided over by the Secretary of the Treasury, which has only of late concerned the U.S. Congress, and with its machinations just recently disclosed to the public. And it was the Dubai Ports deal which exposed the seemingly arbitrary fashion, and unanswerability to any other branch of government which was disturbing. For the decisions CFIUS makes ultimately becomes the responsibility of the U.S. federal government, while possibly compromising its best interests, including U.S. national security.

As it is, the Department of Defense has problems procuring necessary equipment and manufacture of parts from foreign entities, where national security must be weighed over acquisition of parts from offshore. Yet at the same time, the U.S. government has pushed the concept of global trade, often in direct conflict with the protection and national security of the U.S.

Producing powered neodymium-iron-boron permanent magnets is critical to enabling control of aircraft and more specifically cruise missiles guidance systems as well as the Joint Direct Attack Munition or JDAM bomb, used prominently in the 2003 bombing of Baghdad, which preceded arrival of U.S. ground troops there. Magnequench UG, although still headquartered in Indianapolis, IN, is the sole provider of specialized magnets for military aircraft systems. But it closed down its manufacturing arm permanently in 2004 and finished relocating operations to China at that time, with its operations now solely controlled by Chinese companies with direct ties to the Chinese government

Magnequench magnets are produced from a unique patented process of sintering specialty metals. They are used by various electronics and aviation companies, but Magnequench’s primary client is the Pentagon, leaving the U.S. in a rather precarious position with China. Enjoying 85% ownership of the world’s market of rare earth metals, required for its magnet production, Magnequench’s factories are now located in Batou, China. It is there that the world’s only operating rare earth mine exists. Thus, China now owns a monopoly on the manufacture of missile magnets which the U.S. military is dependent upon for its most sophisticated technology and weaponry.

Magnequench’s relocation culminated following several years of what started out as a General Motors subsidiary company in 1986. General Motors was responsible for the development of the manufacture of a permanent magnet material in the early 1980’s and began its production in 1987. In 1995, Magnequench’s majority interest was purchased from General Motors by the Sextant Group, which was comprised of two Chinese companies, San Huan New Material and the China National Non-Ferrous Metals Import and Export Corporation. It is reported that few in the industry or in the federal government knew which companies formed Sextant at that time.

Three years later, after commitment from Magnequench CEO, Archibald Cox, Jr., that its two Indiana-based plants would not be shuttered, its assembly line for magnets in Anderson, IN was shipped to China. In 2000, GA Powders, a subsidiary of Magnequench, originally a Department of Energy project, was relocated from Idaho Falls, ID to Tianjin, China. And in 2004 Magnequench’s other Indiana plant in Valparaiso, IN, responsible for production of elements of the JDAM bomb was shut down and shipped to China. Although there was an “agreement with GM” from Cox that the plant would remain in Anderson, IN according to Clyde South, a negotiator for the United Auto Workers Local 662, Magnequench proceeded to eliminate all of its domestic manufacturing jobs anyway.

Under the 1988 Exxon-Florio Amendment to the Defense Production Act, President Bush could have ordered San Huan New Materials to divest its holdings in Magnequench, as it manufactured a strategic asset. The President was pressed to do so by Congressman Even Bayh and Congressman Pete Visclosky, both of Indiana in 2003, but the President chose not to intercede. In 1990, however, President George H.W. Bush ordered China’s government-owned National Aerospace and Export Company to divest its interest in Mamco Manufacturing of Seattle, WA. At that time it was feared that China would use Mamco to acquire its jet fighter technology.

In addition to this particular example of guidance missile manufacture, the acquisition of titanium is also becoming a problem for the military in procuring spare parts and for its manufacture of its aviation vehicles. The Pentagon continues to have conflicts with the Congress on waiving the Berry Amendment. Enacted in 1941 and updated in 1972, it requires that specialty metals, including rare earth metals, titanium and super alloys, be manufactured in the U.S. for its weapons systems, unless otherwise unattainable. But as more and more American companies relocate offshore, the lines drawn become less and less clear.

And while not appropriate to put the blame of the offshoring of strategic assets on any particular President or branch of government at this time, it is appropriate, however, to see how various factions of the three branches of government, along with the loosening of corporate and industry regulations over the years, have cumulatively jeopardized the interests of the U.S. It is important that lawmakers therefore not become hawkish over the observance of our laws only when it becomes convenient to win political capital, but to how best serve the interests of the U.S. For the ramifications of business as usual when it comes to strategic assets could do irreparable future harm to America’s most vital asset, that being the American people.
 
So China, or potential enemy and soon to be our biggest competitor for resources is in charge of supplying us with our weapon making materials? WTF is going on here?
 
95DevilleNS said:
So China, or potential enemy and soon to be our biggest competitor for resources is in charge of supplying us with our weapon making materials? WTF is going on here?

What a laugh. Where were you when Clinton helped the Chinese be able to nuke us by selling them missile guidance technology? Were you worried then?
 
By Lou Dobbs

(CNN)

NEW YORK CITY (CNN) -- Chinese President Hu Jintao meets with President Bush in the nation's capital Thursday after a cross-country trip for Hu that follows his state dinner with billionaire Bill Gates.

The Chinese president's first two days in this country included stops at Boeing and Microsoft, raising questions about the purpose of President Hu's visit. The fact that Hu's summit at the White House comes only after touring two of our most profitable businesses means "checkbook diplomacy" is no longer purely an American strategy.

China's economy has grown by an average of about 10 percent a year over the past two decades. This year, China moved ahead of Britain and France to become the world's fourth-largest economy. It's also changing the global supply chain, becoming the world's leading buyer of basic commodities, whether grain, meat, coal and steel, and is second to only the United States in consumption of oil. China is buying up American companies and other multinational corporations with almost $900 billion of hard currency reserves.

China has now arrived, and we no longer refer to our series on China's rapid economic and military build-up as "Red Star Rising." The title of that reporting is now "Red Storm."

But the Red Storm cannot be blamed for its continued manipulation of its currency, for its record $202 billion trade surplus with the United States or for buying up American businesses and hard assets around the globe while restricting access to its market and economy.

The fault lies entirely with the U.S. government, our lack of strategy and our failed policies. This administration and U.S. multinational corporations have lost sight of the national interest. This administration and the Republican-led Congress have permitted the dismantling of America's manufacturing base and created a dependency on China for our clothing, computers, consumer electronics and a host of other products that is greater than our dependency on foreign oil.

Make no mistake: Our leaders are the fools, and China's leaders are not to be blamed for taking advantage of this administration's commitment to faith-based economic theories and so-called free trade that permits the Chinese access to the world's richest consumer market while China denies our businesses access to its emerging market.

We can only blame ourselves and our business leaders for offshoring production to China. We can only blame ourselves and our business leaders for permitting the transfer of our knowledge base in technology to China. And we can only blame ourselves and our business leaders for shipping middle-class jobs to China in search of lower labor costs.

When you watch President Hu and President Bush shake hands at the White House, it would be wise for all of us to remember what that handshake costs America. And remember, there's a reason President Hu met with business leaders in Seattle first. He obviously knows who's really in charge of this country.
 
fossten said:
What a laugh. Where were you when Clinton helped the Chinese be able to nuke us by selling them missile guidance technology? Were you worried then?


Does this mean he shouldnt be worried now?

See, I have this problem. Every time someone complains about something that is currently occurring, you jump in with "Clinton did something too" - Does that argument make it more right that it is occurring? No. Clinton is past and cannot be changed. SO is Reagan, So is Carter, Ford, Nixon, etc.

What is going on now is most important.

So fossten, the question is, What do you think about it STILL happening today?
 
Joeychgo said:
Does this mean he shouldnt be worried now?

See, I have this problem. Every time someone complains about something that is currently occurring, you jump in with "Clinton did something too" - Does that argument make it more right that it is occurring? No. Clinton is past and cannot be changed. SO is Reagan, So is Carter, Ford, Nixon, etc.

What is going on now is most important.

So fossten, the question is, What do you think about it STILL happening today?

The only reason these subjects are brought up is to take shots at Bush. The truth is that you can't have it both ways. If you're not worried about your former president selling missile tech, then you really aren't worried about this 'problem." It comes across as false and hypocritical, and I don't take it seriously. It's all about discrediting Bush.

It's the same thing with the Dubai ports deal. You have these politicians suddenly worried about our port security, while they continue to allow massive hemorrhaging at our borders. It's ludicrous.

Everybody that's anti-Bush wants to blame him for every problem we have, especially with regard to terrorism. I don't have a problem with Bush being held responsible for what he does, but I DO have a problem with people blaming him for things that he inherited, like 9/11 for example. So here comes Phil with another blaming article, and once again Bush gets bashed for something that Clinton started.
 
I'll take the bait here, just for entertainment reasons.

Do you think that Bush can simply decide that, in response to policy enacted under Clinton, he can simply impose importation restrictions on China?

Well, he could, under one condition. He says that it's a national security issue. But, if he were to do that, I'm sure I'd see similar posts here and at MoveOn.org about how Bush is a warmongering fool trying to provoke the Chinese.

Otherwise, there is no other recourse. Any limitation would be in direct conflict with the WTO agreement and could result in huge lawsuits and economic penalities imposed upon the U.S.

So, what would you like done?

Here's the solution.
MAKE IT ECONOMICALLY POSSIBLE FOR MANUFACTURING TO REMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. These companies aren't overseas because they like the weather. It's cost prohibative to remain domestic due to regulation and the tax policy here. I'm not saying we should eliminate OSHA, but we need to recreate our tax system. Something like the FairTax would result in a economic boom for the country.
 
Calabrio said:
I'll take the bait here, just for entertainment reasons.

Do you think that Bush can simply decide that, in response to policy enacted under Clinton, he can simply impose importation restrictions on China?

Well, he could, under one condition. He says that it's a national security issue. But, if he were to do that, I'm sure I'd see similar posts here and at MoveOn.org about how Bush is a warmongering fool trying to provoke the Chinese.

Otherwise, there is no other recourse. Any limitation would be in direct conflict with the WTO agreement and could result in huge lawsuits and economic penalities imposed upon the U.S.

So, what would you like done?

Here's the solution.
MAKE IT ECONOMICALLY POSSIBLE FOR MANUFACTURING TO REMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. These companies aren't overseas because they like the weather. It's cost prohibative to remain domestic due to regulation and the tax policy here. I'm not saying we should eliminate OSHA, but we need to recreate our tax system. Something like the FairTax would result in a economic boom for the country.


Ahhh...Once again you invoke my favorite word - FairTax. You do know that Tom DeLay's championing this cause? It would be historic and miraculous, but if anyone can get it done, he can.

mespock said:
This forum didn't exist then to complain! But it does now!

Okay, Rich, DID YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT IT BACK THEN? OUT LOUD? ANYWHERE?

[Edit: Do I really need to explain why, AGAIN. No personal attacks.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fossten said:
Ahhh...Once again you invoke my favorite word - FairTax. You do know that Tom DeLay's championing this cause? It would be historic and miraculous, but if anyone can get it done, he can.

Really? He can do that from prison?
Wow!!!



:D
 
fossten said:
Okay, Rich, DID YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT IT BACK THEN? OUT LOUD? ANYWHERE?

Don't lie, now, we can tell when you're lying because you misspell words.


LVC wasnt around then. SO he couldnt complain here.

And dont call him a liar. How many times do I have to ask you to debate the issue, and not attack the person. Guess what Fossten, everyone who doesnt agree with you is entitled to their opinion also.
 
fossten said:
The only reason these subjects are brought up is to take shots at Bush. The truth is that you can't have it both ways. If you're not worried about your former president selling missile tech, then you really aren't worried about this 'problem." It comes across as false and hypocritical, and I don't take it seriously. It's all about discrediting Bush.

It's the same thing with the Dubai ports deal. You have these politicians suddenly worried about our port security, while they continue to allow massive hemorrhaging at our borders. It's ludicrous.

Everybody that's anti-Bush wants to blame him for every problem we have, especially with regard to terrorism. I don't have a problem with Bush being held responsible for what he does, but I DO have a problem with people blaming him for things that he inherited, like 9/11 for example. So here comes Phil with another blaming article, and once again Bush gets bashed for something that Clinton started.


The question still stands - does it make it more right that someone else started it and Bush hasnt changed it?

For example. You can blame anyone you want for the border security situation, past and present. But Bush can fix it anytimehe wants by dispatching federal agents or military troops to the border. But he doesnt. Why?

Things arent hypocritical. fossten, most people dont comment just to bash Bush. (thats just the end result) You tend to drag things into that whold Bush vs Clinton thing.

My friend. TRY - just TRY to debate these issues without using Bush, Clinton, Democrats, Liberals, or any similar word. Bet you cant do it.

Fact is, most of these issues are bigger then any one person or group of people. DO you think Bush is responsible for the Dubia ports thing? Nope. He didnt know about it until we found out about it. That happened so many levels below him I cant really even apply the "buck stops here" argument.

Do I like Bush, no. But do I think he is responsible for everything? no. Neither are republicans or democrats, or clinton or whatever.
 
97silverlsc said:
Really? He can do that from prison?
Wow!!!



:D
Now that is power if Tom DeLay can do that from prison. FOSSTEN The Godfather said it better than i could, and [Edited by MonsterMark...no fanning of flames necessary]
 
fossten said:
What a laugh. Where were you when Clinton helped the Chinese be able to nuke us by selling them missile guidance technology? Were you worried then?

I was in my early 20's back then and not overly worried or preoccupied with politics. Had I been, I probably would of said the same thing, "WTF!?". Besides, it's not the same thing, supplying them with material vs. China being the sole supplier of our weapons ingredients, not good, but different. Also, what relations were we in with China back then compared to now and what were the world politics like? Correct me if I am wrong, but a bit more stable I believe.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top