Nov
16
So That’s The Reason for the China Arms Embargo?
Posted by Clif Burns at 7:03 pm on November 16, 2011
Category: Arms Export • Criminal Penalties
NJ-based Swiss Technology, Inc. was sentenced yesterday to probation in connection with its guilty plea last July to charges that it violated the Arms Export Control Act when it exported diagrams of military rifle parts to China for manufacture there. The company was also ordered to pay $1.1 million in restitution to the Department of Defense.
The DOJ press release in July regarding the initial plea is larded with the typically hyperbolic language of prosecutors in export cases, but with a twist.
“We simply can’t risk that companies trying to manufacture military equipment on the cheap will expose our troops to more danger than they already face,†said U.S. Attorney Fishman.
“Our armed forces deserve the very best equipment to perform their missions in these difficult times,†said Edward T. Bradley, Special Agent in Charge, Department of Defense, Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), Northeast Field Office. “Fraudulent practices, designed to illegally enrich a corporation, and which could compromise the integrity and reliability of that vital equipment is inexcusable. The Defense Criminal Investigative Service is committed to vigorously investigating such violations of law.â€
“This case underscores ICE’s commitment to work tirelessly with our law enforcement partners to investigate individuals or corporate organizations that circumvent federal regulations in the name of greed,†said Peter T. Edge, Special Agent in Charge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigation (ICE HSI) in Newark. “When our troops’ safety is put in jeopardy, our national security is also compromised.â€
And here I always thought that the purpose of the China arms embargo was to keep weapons and military technology out of the hands of the Chicoms because they were a military threat. Instead it appears that the reason is because they make shoddy stuff. If that’s the reason, is an arms embargo of Taiwan next?
Permalink
Copyright © 2011 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)
3 Comments:
If you want to know how ChiCom copies of the US: M16, M60, M240, M2, Mini-Gun would look, just attend a Chinese Police Show like CIPATE. They already have the info. Exporting gun parts from China is more difficult than Importing gun parts from China to the US. How will this be handled if all Category 1 weapons are moved to Comerce? Will Type 7 FFLs be required to pay $2,250 per year for the privilege of being registered with State? Even dealers who don’t export.
I get your point, but your insinuation that Taiwan is incapable of manufacturing high-quality goods is off target. Just because American manufacturers (OEMs) have crap produced in Taiwan, doesn’t mean Taiwan can only produce crap. Taiwan produces the crap that American consumers demand; it also produces the high-quality goods that discriminating customers elsewhere demand.
The unfortunate circumstance for Taiwan is that its biggest market is the U.S., and so it produces a lot of crap. More than a few Taiwan businessmen have complained to me that America is ruining their reputation, lamenting that, sadly, the U.S. market is their bread and butter.
American OEMs design cheap crap, when they could just as easily design high-quality goods. I worked in procurement in Taiwan, and American OEMs would provide prototypes and/or CAD designs that would allow for the least amount of plastic per injected unit, often by compromising strength and durability. I had to re-engineer some of those products, putting in gussets and baffles that were required to keep them from collapsing or folding up. Unit cost increases per item could be measured in pennies, or less. Sure, if you’re making millions of them, the cost adds up, but at what cost to the bottom line, when returns by customers cost an even greater amount to both finances and good will?
But whose fault is it that American OEMs have to scrape rock bottom in order to produce a competitive product? The problem is American consumers.
Americans are cheap and will search for the goods that are lowest in price, and then these same cheap customers have the chutzpah to complain about the quality of the crap they buy. I see it all the time in stores, when the wife says, for example, “Oh, here, honey! This hose nozzle is cheaper than that one”; never mind that the molded buttons and levers have no function, but are there to give the impression that the nozzle is comparable to the more expensive one with real buttons and levers. Or the husband says, “Well, dear, this pair of shoes is only half the price of that pair, and they look the same”; never mind that she’ll soon be cranky as all get out and needing the services of a podiatrist for lack of good foot support.
Appearance and performance are two different things, people! And, you get what you pay for. Oh, and caveat emptor.
Americans don’t understand value; they only understand price. They’ll buy a product that is a nickel cheaper, even though it has only half the value of the more expensive one. And then they say Taiwan makes crap. No, Americans buy crap, and Taiwan makes what American buyers and American OEMs and American stores procure for them. This is another reason why our manufacturing sector has become gutted. Few Americans understand that price isn’t everything, but stores that only stock the best quality goods will soon be put out of business by those that stock all the cheap crap from overseas.
And it isn’t because that’s all they can produce overseas; it’s because that’s what Americans want. Their money speaks for them, and it says, “Cheap, cheap, cheap!”
BTW, has anyone considered the problem of arms procurement from China in the event we go to war with them?
I didn’t mean to insinuate that Taiwan is incapable of manufacturing high quality goods any more than I was endorsing the AUSA’s ridiculous assertion that everything produced in the PRC was low quality. I mentioned Taiwan only because the same “cheap stuff” misperception might be applied to them.
