As we noted here last week, the surprise selection of an EADS-Northrop Grumman joint bid for a $35 billion Defense contract last week has been the source of much consternation on Capitol Hill. Some lawmakers, outraged that the European conglomerate which owns Airbus was picked over U.S. aerospace giant Boeing, seem determined to keep the deal from going forward. Officials from the U.S. Air Force and Northrop Grumman scrambled to defend the contract this week amid allegations in Congress of “a European economic stimulus plan” and threats to withhold funding for the project.

From yesterday’s Politico:

Other critics argue that hiring the European-based EADS to provide military equipment raises national security questions.

Northrop Grumman, though, dismissed the national security concerns as a red herring, stressing the fact that the Los Angeles-based company is the prime contractor on the program.

“What we are doing is exactly what Boeing would do,” said Northrop Grumman spokesman Randy Belote. “There are no issues relative to any U.S. secrets, any transfer of technology out of the United States to Europe. It just doesn’t happen under our process.”

See the full story at Politico.com.

Today’s Politico has an extensive report on the Northrop/EADS team’s lobbying strategy as it fights Boeing’s formal protest of the award, filed Tuesday with the GAO.

Related Posts:
Pentagon Contract a “Massive Breakthrough” for European Companies, 6 March 2008

See Also:
Air Force slammed in Congress for Boeing contract, Politico, 12 March 2008
Defence contract was won fair and square, Op-ed, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), Financial Times, 10 March 2008
Northrop rallies lobbying troops to save contract, Politico, 12 March 2008

The surprise selection of a European corporation for a major U.S. military contract - to build $35 billion worth of in-flight refueling tankers - has sent shock waves through the world of defense contractors. There were strong reactions both in the U.S. and Europe as officials and executives grappled with the political implications of the choice of the EADS/Northrop Grumman consortium over Boeing, which had been heavily favored to replace the existing fleet of Boeing-built tankers with a new model. But Pentagon officials said the tanker model proposed by EADS with its junior U.S. partner clearly came out ahead in four of the five categories that were the basis for the contract. The common-sense assumption in Washington is that the Northrop/EADS offer must have been far superior for the Bush administration to risk alienating domestic interests in an election year by choosing an airplane perceived by many in Congress as being largely built by a “French” company. (more…)