The USAF - Undoubtedly, the most powerful Air Force in the world but does its strength solely come from its technological ingenuity or also from break-neck diplomacy in defense sales of its aircraft to foreign buyers?

              From the iconic F-14 Tomcat of Grumman showcased in Tom Cruise's Top Gun to the 5th generation Boeing F-35 Lightning-II and the Boeing F-47 not to mention everything in between including the legendary F-15 Eagle/Strike Eagle/EX, F-16, F-18, F-18 E/F Superhornet or its electronic warfare version - the F-18 Growler used by the Navy, from the ground attack A-10 to stealth bombers like F-117 Nighthawk, B-2 Spirit and the more recent B-21 Raider - the United States has undoubtedly produced so many extraordinary aircraft via its defense companies like Grumman, Northrop, Lockheed-Martin and Boeing among others. These have gone on, not just to impress military aviation enthusiasts around the world but have also been battle tested and proven themselves worthy. Yet the question arises, is it just the technological prowess and ingenuity of the USAF's defense companies like the ones mentioned above that have given the US defense establishment an edge over every other air force in the world or is there a darker side which many often overlook which we will delve deep into which is the cut-throat competitive mindset that drives the US government and its air defense companies that seek to market their aircraft to partner countries ahead of competition from other countries seeking to have autonomy in their self-defense capabilities and why the US seeks to put down companies from other countries and cannot handle competition in the military aviation sector.

     Yes, it is true that while US military aircraft are very capable in their roles whether air-to-air, air-to-ground or other roles. The US seeks to aggressively market its military aircraft to its partners and we will delve into the reasons for the same below and finally we will see my stance on this topic in the light of countries like my own - India that seeks to have its own autonomy and interests in this sector

                                                                    

i) The X-factor -

     It is only fair to think that any country which seeks to be ahead of the rest of the world in a certain area - here, the military aviation industry would seek to place its own interests ahead of everyone else's but what does allowing foreign aircraft manufacturing companies to flourish mean for the US and why has it been always trying to nip the creativity of military aircraft companies' in the bud or even try to wipe out competition from other nations altogether, if Washington sells its aircraft to other countries, it already knows the capabilities of those planes whereas if its partners go in for any plane made by another nation with a competing aircraft industry, then the US defense establishment fears the unknown capabilities of that other aircraft which I call here - the "X-factor". For those who think that this did not happen, I can cite a couple of countries that once were known for their creativity in the military aviation sector but whose military aviation sector was wiped out completely because of these partners of Washington agreeing to shut down their own aircraft industries so that they would get aircraft from the US.

a) The UK:
                    Home to famous aircraft companies after WW-II like English Electric, Gloster or Folland, the UK was known for its own aircraft companies that created very capable aircraft of their own. These were companies that manufactured a slew of combat-tested aircraft through the 50's and 60's but while many might cite the UK's entry into the EU as a reason for these companies ceasing to produce planes for the UK as the latter started depending on a consortium of EU manufacturers leading to the creation of the Eurofighter Typhoon. Another more important reason why the UK's domestic military aircraft companies stopped making newer aircraft is because of US policy which already started pitching in and competing with the UK's domestic industry through aircraft like the F-4 Phantom which was offered to the Royal Navy which flew it in the 70's and now the RAF is flying the F-35 Lightning-II. Now while many may argue that there are still companies that make aircraft, these are not companies that design UK's military aircraft like before rather make components for existing aircraft.


b) Israel:
              Another more famous example of US exerting its diplomatic authority on another country so that it could have its influence on the establishment while seeking to give its own air force the edge is an ally of US - Israel. Israel knew that depending on other countries was a very dangerous prospect because if those countries were part of another, bigger pact, Israel could face arms embargoes from the world in the light of the Arab league and Palestinian media lies being spread through the more potent media machine of the PA that was spreading lies about Israel which meant more countries would hesitate to sell weapons to Israel from Europe. The IAI (Israel Aircraft Industries) was created and the 1st plane made by them was a custom-built version of the Mirage-5 called the "Nesher" followed by the "Kfir". Later, the most famous example of the IAI was the Lavi ("Young Lion" in Hebrew). No sooner were prototypes of the plane built when the US approached the Israeli establishment to tell them that if they totally gave up the idea of creating their own aircraft, the US would supply them with aircraft of their own - a promise which they kept by selling them F-15's, F-16's and now the F-35 Lightning-II called in Israel by the name "Adir". The IAI Lavi would have been a very capable plane had it been built by the Israelis and it would have no doubt given the Israeli defense establishment autonomy without having to depend on any other country which could have made Israel a potent world player in the area of a robust domestic aircraft industry which was nipped in the bud by the US military establishment in a very diplomatic way. In the end, the US killed 2 birds with 1 stone by making Israel give up its own domestic military aircraft industry - it could avoid the frightening prospect of having its pilots facing off Israeli aircraft in the hands of another world country in the future should war break out between those 2 countries and secondly, by selling the Israelis their planes, the US kept the Israelis under their tech leash while fully knowing the capabilities of the Israeli Air Force since the latter uses American aircraft.

c) Canada: 
                    Canada is yet another famous example because there has been at least 1 famous aircraft which would have been a very potent interceptor from that nation - the CF-105 Arrow developed by Avro Canada which was abandoned because of US offering Canada its own aircraft among other reasons.

ii) Bringing down per unit production costs:

                This is something which is well-known in production industries around the world whatever is being produced because per unit costs of aircraft or anything else being produced would drop considerably if more countries bank on US equipment for their own Air Forces. This is however, a reason which mainly is a benefit for the US aircraft corporations which the USAF would also look at as an advantage because they can save more money for each unit produced, if more buyers come in and choose their aircraft.

iii)  Being fully ahead of the rest of the world via transfer of future aircraft to client countries while saving the best technological advances for the US:

           Diplomacy usually makes it look like it is the client countries that usually benefit. For instance, some components of the F-16 are made domestically in India as a reason (in support of Modi's "Make in India" policy) to make the Indian government get onboard the US bandwagon by purchasing the F-21 which is nothing else but a more advanced F-16 and the US also promised India that if we bought the F-21, we can later get the F-35 Lightning-II as a follow-up. However, the Indian defense establishment knows that going in for US aircraft would mean that our own domestic aircraft industry would take a beating and that we would be under the USAF's tech leash which is why the Indian government went in for the Dassault Rafale instead (anything is better than being under a very ambitious country like the US that wants to rule the skies and would go to any extent to market its equipment over ones made by other countries), aside from the other reason that our airmen were more used to French aircraft already used by our air force like the Mirage-2000 and the Anglo-French Jaguar among others. The availability of aircraft industries in Europe aside from Russia means that India has a lot more sellers to choose from, sellers like Dassault aviation which are again targets of the US defense juggernaut trying to rule sales of aircraft to other countries in the market. Not so surprisingly, the US is known to have offered the F-35 Lightning-II to France but thankfully France rejected it in favour of the Rafale in order to boost its own domestic aircraft industry represented by Dassault Aviation.  


   What are my thoughts on this?. I am a Francophile and I also support nations seeking to be autonomous in their own defense industries like in the case of my country India or in the case of France which turned down the F-35 offer of the US in favour of developing its own home-grown Dassault Rafale by Dassault Aviation. I believe that being independent is the way forward in the future as all countries look to their own interests pretty much like why the US is seeking to market its own planes even to the detriment of the aircraft industries of other nations. This has become increasingly clearer in Trump's America which is imposing tariffs on all countries left, right and centre in a bid to put forward its own interests and those of its citizens which is precisely how other countries would feel about their industries and citizens too!!!. Moreover, if every Air Force in the world of the US' partner nations were to be flying F-16s, F-15s, F-18's, F-35s etc, the sky would become a very boring place and the creativity of the aerospace industry around the world would be at an all time low keeping the US' knowledge of the sector at a peak which solely works to the US' national interests whereas other countries would neither have a way to develop their own knowledge in the aerospace industry nor would the domestic aviation sectors of other countries be able work to produce aircraft that can offer viable options for other partner nations to opt for aside from keeping the national aircraft industries of those other non-US countries independent and free from US interference - which is critical to ensure greater diversity of military aircraft that boringly only do not come from 1 nation - the US, long live autonomy of nations seeking to develop their own military aircraft industries without external influence or interference!!!