UK threatening to pull out of the F-35 JSF programme if the US dose'nt share technology, page 5

Originally posted by Brenden
Article 23

4. Access to Classified Information either Confidential or Secret by a person holding the dual nationality of both a Party and an EU country shall be granted without the prior authorisation of the originating Party. Access not covered by this paragraph shall follow the consultation process as described in the Annex on security of Classified Information.

www.grip.org...

ie give secrets to the UK and constitutiuonally they are bound to pass it on to their european partners.

- You think you have it down because you've managed to pull one out of context paragraph.......

....... out of a document of how many paragraphs and words; which itself is set against how many documents, protocols and international agreements (on trade and security/defence)!?

I notice you've not bothered referring to the caveats and exceptions referred to in the small print nor how this relates to other international agreements.

For instance, I see you chose not to quote article 24

Article 24

1. The Parties shall not release, disclose, use or permit the release, disclosure or use of any Classified Information except for the purpose and limitations stated by the originating Party.

You also left out reference to article 44

Article 44

Where Technical Information is received from a third party or another Party, nothing in this Agreement shall prejudice the rights of that third party or other Party with regard to that Technical Information.

Furthermore, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as requiring a Party to disclose Technical Information contrary to national security laws and regulations or laws and regulations on export controls or contrary to any end user agreements where an appropriate waiver has not been secured.

www.grip.org...

- But I suppose that just wrecks the point you are attempting to make......or didn't you read the document beyond the bit you thought gave you what you wanted?

Had you read article 1 properly you would have found right at the begining of this document the statement -

Article 1

The objective of this Agreement is to:

(e) facilitate exchanges of Classified Information between the Parties or their defence industry under security provisions, which do not undermine the security of such Classified Information

(same source)

In fact the document is full of those sorts of conditions over what is at heart an attempt at closer European coopertion, not ripping off the tech or ideas of anyone else.

I'm really not intending this as flame bait but IMO it's rather ridiculous, quite frankly this is at best simply incorrect and at worst laughably dishonest.
I suppose it is 'legal-ise' so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

In addition there are umteen legal documents going back several decades circulating between the US, UK, EU, Germany, France etc etc.
Some public and some not.
One paragraph in a single document does not give you total understanding of 'how it is'.
It's quite absurd to suggest otherwise.

But lets be perfectly clear about this, if that is the attitude of your government to a technology sharing partner like the UK, then kindly let us know right at the start of the program before we part with a few billion £ (not US $) of our cash and share our high-tech freely with you guys.
(No-one could do a practical V/Stol without our engines, control systems and help).

Way to make a best friend and ally really reconsider where we stand with each other.
Real brains at work there.

Consider too that China is now a 'strategic partner' with China.

- You don't say.

I suppose this is some kind of misworded attempt to imply the EU arms embargo is not still in force (you might care to know that it still is) or to cloud the issue that Chain's biggest arms dealer is in fact the USA and not Europe.

But what the hell, who's interested in the relevant facts, hmmmmm?

[edit on 7-3-2006 by sminkeypinkey]