{"id":37027,"date":"2017-09-06T15:15:59","date_gmt":"2017-09-06T15:15:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/uncategorized\/2017\/09\/06\/industrial-base-requirements-complicate-nato-capability-growth\/"},"modified":"2026-08-07T22:56:04","modified_gmt":"2026-08-07T22:56:04","slug":"industrial-base-requirements-complicate-nato-capability-growth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/defense-news-conference\/2017\/09\/06\/industrial-base-requirements-complicate-nato-capability-growth\/","title":{"rendered":"Industrial base requirements complicate NATO capability growth"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

WASHINGTON \u2015 As NATO attempts to modernize its capabilities, it is looking for ways to convince allied nations to invest in alliance capability gaps over other domestic defense requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One perennial roadblock: Host nations have to weigh industrial base concerns with their defense dollars. And there is no easy solution, even as NATO looks to increase outreach to the commercial technology sector in allied countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Part of the challenge, said Air Commodore Ralph Reefman, assistant chief of staff for defense planning at NATO Allied Command Transformation, is that NATO has no role in helping to align those requirements with local interests, noting the alliance targets an effect, and it is \u201cup to the individual ally how to get an industrial offset.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/atype-video-jwplayer>
Air Commodore Ralph Reefman, assistant chief of staff for defense planning at NATO Allied Command Transformation, sat down with Defense News to talk about capability gaps and the challenge of coordinating 29 member states to meet budgetary needs.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n

\u201cThe solution would be [a] multinational solution, making sure that if a country that perhaps doesn\u2019t have that industrial base or has reasons to protect its industrial base, that we do recognize this and start to work together,\u201d he said at the Defense News Conference on Sept. 6.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Click here for more coverage and updates from the Defense News Conference<\/a><\/b>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Which is why the F-35 joint strike fighter model has been successful, he added, with individual nations able to claim parts of the industrial base during production, and then able to bid to claim roles in the ongoing sustainment effort.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Balancing industrial needs with vital interoperability is also part of the challenge, said Iain King, defense counselor for policy and nuclear issues with the British Embassy in the U.S.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He held up the U.K.\u2019s new aircraft carrier, to be named the Prince of Wales on Friday, as an example of how to make that work. That carrier was \u201cbuilt almost entirely in the U.K., but the software and some parts of it were built in other countries,\u201d specifically with the fact in mind that the ship will host F-35s in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\t