DOCSLIB.ORG

U.S. Imaging and Sensors Industry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
U.S. Imaging and Sensors Industry Defense Industrial Base Assessment: U.S. Imaging and Sensors Industry October 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security Office of Strategic Industries and Economic Security Defense Industrial Base Assessment: U.S. Imaging and Sensors Industry Prepared By U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security Office of Strategic Industries and Economic Security For further information about this report, contact Ron DeMarines, Senior Trade and Industry Analyst (202) 482-3755 [email protected]; or Brad Botwin, Supervisory Industrial Specialist (202) 482-4060 [email protected] Learn more about our organization at http://www.bis.doc.gov/ Table of Contents I. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................I-1 II. Technology Overview ...................................................................................................... II-1 A. Imaging and Sensors Technologies ........................................................................II-1 A.1 Image and Sensor Devices...............................................................................II-2 B. Image Enhancement................................................................................................II-3 B.1 Generation 1.....................................................................................................II-4 B.2 Generation 2....................................................................................................II-5 B.3 Generation 3....................................................................................................II-5 C. Thermal Imaging.....................................................................................................II-6 C.1 Uncooled .........................................................................................................II-7 C.2 Cryogenically cooled ......................................................................................II-7 C.3 Generation 1....................................................................................................II-8 C.4 Generation 2....................................................................................................II-9 C.5 Generation 3....................................................................................................II-9 III. Financial Performance..................................................................................................III-1 A. Sales by Product for Manufacturers, Integrators, and Service Providers ... ......... III-2 B. Sales Per Employee............................................................................................... III-9 C. Capital Investment .............................................................................................. III-10 D. Industry Financials.............................................................................................. III-12 D.1 Image and Sensor Operations ..................................................................... III-12 D.2 Current Ratio............................................................................................... III-13 D.3 Quick Ratio ................................................................................................. III-13 D.4 Overall Operations...................................................................................... III-14 E. Earnings............................................................................................................... III-16 E.1 Retailers, Distributors, Resellers, and Brokers............................................ III-16 E.2 Defense and Non-Defense Earnings............................................................ III-17 E.3 U.S. and Foreign-Made Product Earnings .................................................. III-18 E.4 Product Categories ...................................................................................... III-19 IV. Domestic and Foreign Business Relationships, Content and Sourcing....................................................................................................IV-1 A. Domestic and Foreign Business Relationships..................................................... IV-1 A.1 Manufacturers, Integrators, and Service Provider Establishments ............... IV-1 A.2 Research Organizations and Laboratories .................................................... IV-2 A.3 Distributors, Resellers, Retailers, and Brokers ............................................. IV-4 B. International and Multinational Ownership and Alliances ................................... IV-4 C. Mergers and Acquisitions ..................................................................................... IV-6 D. Foreign Content .................................................................................................... IV-8 E. Domestic and Foreign Sourcing............................................................................ IV-9 V. Research & Development................................................................................................ V-1 A. R&D – Manufacturers and Laboratories................................................................ V-1 A.1 Manufacturer R&D Trends............................................................................ V-1 A.2 Manufacturer R&D Sources .......................................................................... V-2 B. R&D – Research Organizations and Laboratories................................................. V-3 B.1 Research Organization and Laboratory R&D Trends.................................... V-4 VI. Employment and Workforce........................................................................................VI-1 A. Employment by Occupation ................................................................................. VI-1 A.1 Manufacturers, System Integrators, and Service Providers.......................... VI-1 A.2 R&D Staff Degree Status.............................................................................. VI-2 B. Labor Concerns ..................................................................................................... VI-3 B.1 Shortage of Workers ..................................................................................... VI-3 B.2 Workforce Age.............................................................................................. VI-4 B.3 Labor Costs ................................................................................................... VI-5 C. Research Organizations and Laboratories.............................................................. VI-5 C.1 Employment (Federal vs. Private) (Defense vs. Non-Defense).................... VI-5 D. Occupation – All Research Organizations and Laboratories, U.S. Citizens.......... VI-7 D.1 All Labs......................................................................................................... VI-7 D.2 Government Labs.......................................................................................... VI-7 D.3 Private Industry Labs .................................................................................... VI-8 D.4 University Labs............................................................................................. VI-9 E. Occupation – All Research Organizations and Laboratories, Non-Citizens........ VI-10 E.1 Private Industry Labs................................................................................... VI-11 E.2 University Labs ........................................................................................... VI-12 F. Skilled Worker Age Range................................................................................... VI-13 F.1 Government, Private Industry, and University Laboratories....................... VI-13 G. Laboratory Staff Degree Status............................................................................ VI-14 H. Labor Concerns.................................................................................................... VI-15 VII. Imaging/Sensors Imports and Exports .................................................................... VII-1 A. Overview..............................................................................................................VII-1 B. Imports of Imaging and Sensors Products ...........................................................VII-2 B.1 Import Sources ............................................................................................VII-3 C. Exports of Imaging and Sensors Products ...........................................................VII-4 C.1 Export Destinations .....................................................................................VII-6 C.2 Exports Reported by Retailers, Distributors, Brokers and Resellers ...........VII-7 D. U.S. Share of the Global Export Market..............................................................VII-9 VIII. Export Controls.......................................................................................................VIII-1 A. Export Licensing................................................................................................ VIII-1 B. DOC Export Licensing History.......................................................................... VIII-2 C. ITAR Controls.................................................................................................... VIII-6 C.1 Comparison of Exports Controlled by the ITAR and the EAR ................. VIII-7 D. Denied
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Prepared by Textore, Inc. Peter Wood, David Yang, and Roger Cliff November 2020
    AIR-TO-AIR MISSILES CAPABILITIES AND DEVELOPMENT IN CHINA Prepared by TextOre, Inc. Peter Wood, David Yang, and Roger Cliff November 2020 Printed in the United States of America by the China Aerospace Studies Institute ISBN 9798574996270 To request additional copies, please direct inquiries to Director, China Aerospace Studies Institute, Air University, 55 Lemay Plaza, Montgomery, AL 36112 All photos licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license, or under the Fair Use Doctrine under Section 107 of the Copyright Act for nonprofit educational and noncommercial use. All other graphics created by or for China Aerospace Studies Institute Cover art is "J-10 fighter jet takes off for patrol mission," China Military Online 9 October 2018. http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/view/2018-10/09/content_9305984_3.htm E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.airuniversity.af.mil/CASI https://twitter.com/CASI_Research @CASI_Research https://www.facebook.com/CASI.Research.Org https://www.linkedin.com/company/11049011 Disclaimer The views expressed in this academic research paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. Government or the Department of Defense. In accordance with Air Force Instruction 51-303, Intellectual Property, Patents, Patent Related Matters, Trademarks and Copyrights; this work is the property of the U.S. Government. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights Reproduction and printing is subject to the Copyright Act of 1976 and applicable treaties of the United States. This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This publication is provided for noncommercial use only.
    [Show full text]
  • Northrop Grumman
    Northrop Grumman Northrop Grumman Corporation Type Public (NYSE: NOC) 1927 (in 1994, company took on Founded current name), Denver, Colorado Headquarters Los Angeles, California Ronald Sugar, Chairman and Key people CEO Industry Aerospace and defense Aircraft carriers, military aircraft, satellites, missile defense Products systems, advanced electronic sensors and systems, Information Technology, ships, and systems Revenue $30.15 Billion USD (2006) Net income $1.59 Billion USD (2006) Employees 123,600 (2007) Website NorthropGrumman.com Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC) is an aerospace and defense conglomerate that is the result of the 1994 purchase of Grumman by Northrop. The company is the third largest defense contractor for the U.S. military[1], and the number-one builder of naval vessels. Northrop Grumman employs over 122,000 people worldwide[2]. Its 2006 annual revenue is reported at US$30 billion. Northrop Grumman ranks #73 on the 2007 Fortune 500 list of U.S. industrial companies.[3] Products and services Some of the most expensive vehicles in the world, such as this B-2 Spirit strategic bomber, are made by Northrop Grumman and purchased by the United States government. Naval 1 Northrop Grumman's many products are made by separate business units. Newport News Shipbuilding manufactures all U.S. aircraft carriers, and is the only company capable of building Nimitz-class supercarriers. It also produces a large percentage of U.S. nuclear submarines. A separate sector, Northrop Grumman Ship Systems, produces amphibious assault ships and many other commercial and military craft, including icebreakers, tankers, and cargo ships. In a partnership with Science Applications International Corporation, Northrop Grumman provides naval engineering and architecture services as well as naval maintenance services Aerospace A BQM-74 Chukar unmanned aerial drone launches from a U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Annual Report $2B
    2019 ANNUAL REPORT HUNTINGTON INGALLS INDUSTRIES INGALLS INDUSTRIES HUNTINGTON 2019 annual RE P ort $2B HII HAS INVESTED NEARLY $2 BILLION IN CAPITAL EXPENDITURES OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS AT ITS INGALLS AND NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING FACILITIES TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCIES AND AFFORDABILITY ACROSS THE ENTERPRISE. Ingalls Shipbuilding, in Pascagoula, Mississippi, is the largest supplier of U.S. Navy surface combatants. HUNTINGTON INGALLS INDUSTRIES Huntington Ingalls Industries is America’s largest military shipbuilding company and a provider of professional services to partners in government and industry. For more than a century, HII’s Newport News and Ingalls shipbuilding divisions in Virginia and Mississippi have built more ships in more ship classes than any other U.S. naval shipbuilder. HII’s Technical Solutions division supports national security missions around the globe with unmanned systems, defense and federal solutions, nuclear and environmental services, and fleet sustainment. Headquartered in Newport News, Virginia, HII employs more than 42,000 people operating both domestically and internationally. Cover Image: Newport News Shipbuilding delivered USS Delaware (SSN 791) to the U.S. Navy in 2019. FINANCIAL OPERATING RESULTS ($ in millions, except per share amounts) 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 Sales and Service Revenues $ 8,899 $ 8,176 $ 7,441 $ 7,068 $ 7,020 Operating Income 736 951 881 876 774 Operating Margin 8.3 % 11.6 % 11.8 % 12.4 % 11.0 % (1) Adjusted Segment Operating Income 660 663 688 715 769 Adjusted Segment Operating Margin (1) 7.4 % 8.1 % 9.2 % 10.1 % 11.0 % Diluted EPS 13.26 19.09 10.46 12.14 8.36 (2) Adjusted Diluted EPS 14.01 19.09 12.14 12.14 10.55 Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities 896 914 814 822 861 (1)Adjusted Segment Operating Income and Adjusted Segment Operating Margin are non-GAAP financial measures that exclude the operating FAS/CAS adjustment, non-current state income taxes, goodwill impairment charges and purchased intangibles impairment charges.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerospace, Defense, and Government Services Mergers & Acquisitions
    Aerospace, Defense, and Government Services Mergers & Acquisitions (January 1993 - April 2020) Huntington BAE Spirit Booz Allen L3Harris Precision Rolls- Airbus Boeing CACI Perspecta General Dynamics GE Honeywell Leidos SAIC Leonardo Technologies Lockheed Martin Ingalls Northrop Grumman Castparts Safran Textron Thales Raytheon Technologies Systems Aerosystems Hamilton Industries Royce Airborne tactical DHPC Technologies L3Harris airport Kopter Group PFW Aerospace to Aviolinx Raytheon Unisys Federal Airport security Hydroid radio business to Hutchinson airborne tactical security businesses Vector Launch Otis & Carrier businesses BAE Systems Dynetics businesses to Leidos Controls & Data Premiair Aviation radios business Fiber Materials Maintenance to Shareholders Linndustries Services to Valsef United Raytheon MTM Robotics Next Century Leidos Health to Distributed Energy GERAC test lab and Technologies Inventory Locator Service to Shielding Specialities Jet Aviation Vienna PK AirFinance to ettain group Night Vision business Solutions business to TRC Base2 Solutions engineering to Sopemea 2 Alestis Aerospace to CAMP Systems International Hamble aerostructure to Elbit Systems Stormscope product eAircraft to Belcan 2 GDI Simulation to MBDA Deep3 Software Apollo and Athene Collins Psibernetix ElectroMechanical Aciturri Aeronautica business to Aernnova IMX Medical line to TransDigm J&L Fiber Services to 0 Knight Point Aerospace TruTrak Flight Systems ElectroMechanical Systems to Safran 0 Pristmatic Solutions Next Generation 911 to Management
    [Show full text]
  • Advances in Inertial Guidance Technology for Aerospace Systems
    AIAA 2013-5123 August 19-22, 2013, Boston, MA AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) Conference Advances in Inertial Guidance Technology for Aerospace Systems Robert D. Braun1, Zachary R. Putnam2, Bradley A. Steinfeldt3, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332 and Michael J. Grant4 Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN,47907 The origin, evolution, and outlook of guidance as a path and trajectory manager for aerospace systems is addressed. A survey of theoretical developments in the field is presented demonstrating the advances in guidance system functionality built upon inertial navigation technology. Open-loop and closed-loop approaches for short-range systems, long-range systems and entry systems are described for both civilian and military applications. Over time, guidance system development has transitioned from passive and open-loop systems to active, closed-loop systems. Significant advances in onboard processing power have improved guidance system capabilities, shifting the algorithmic computational burden to onboard systems and setting the stage for autonomous aerospace systems. Seminal advances in aerospace guidance are described, highlighting the advancements in guidance and resulting performance improvements in aerospace systems. Nomenclature aT = Thrust acceleration vector D = Drag f1 = Proportional gain f2 = Derivative gain f4 = Integral gain g = Acceleration due to gravity H = Altitude m = Mass v = Velocity vg = Velocity-to-be-gained vector Q = Gain matrix Downloaded by PURDUE UNIVERSITY on January 13, 2014 | http://arc.aiaa.org DOI: 10.2514/6.2013-5123 R = Slant range T = Thrust magnitude ( )0 = Reference value I. Introduction HE objective of guidance is to modify the trajectory of a vehicle in order to reach a target1.
    [Show full text]
  • Printmgr File
    Huntington Ingalls Industries Notice of Annual Meeting And Proxy Statement 2019 Letter to Our Stockholders March 18, 2019 Dear Fellow Stockholders: On behalf of the Board of Directors and management team of Huntington Ingalls Industries, I would like to invite you to attend the 2019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. We will meet on Tuesday, April 30, 2019, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time, at our corporate headquarters located at the Herbert H. Bateman Virginia Advanced Shipbuilding and Carrier Integration Center (VASCIC), 2401 West Avenue, Newport News, Virginia 23607. We are looking forward to your responses on the proposals included in the accompanying proxy statement. The accompanying Notice of 2019 Annual Meeting and Proxy Statement describe the matters on which you, as a stockholder, may vote at the annual meeting, and include details of the business to be conducted at the meeting. As a way to conserve natural resources and reduce annual meeting costs, we are electronically distributing proxy materials as permitted under rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Many of you will receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials containing instructions on how to access the proxy materials via the Internet. You can also request mailed paper copies if preferred. You can expedite delivery and reduce our mailing expenses by confirming in advance your preference for electronic delivery of future proxy materials. For more information on how to take advantage of this cost-saving service, please see page 14 of the proxy statement. Your vote is very important. Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting, I encourage you to vote your shares in advance.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problems of Standardization of Ground-To-Air Missiles
    5th International Scientific and Business Conference—Future Engineering 2019 ISBN: 978-1-60595-632-9 The Problems of Standardization of Ground-to-Air Missiles Paweł Dobrzyński1, Stanisław Lipski2, Bogdan Machowski1 and Roman Musiał3 ABSTRACT The article presents the issue of determining tactical and technical premises for proposed standards of calibres of ground-to-air missiles. The possession of the missile-to-air missile systems by the state is not an end in itself, or a way of mutual allied settlements, and is a requirement of the modern battlefield. In connection with the decisions made in the Wisła program, only the Narew program implemented by Polish enterprises can improve the air defense capabilities of the country and operational forces. The proposal for the standardization of ground-to- air missiles is aimed at defining the requirements for these missiles to such an extent as to increase the sense of security of citizens in peacetime, while, in wartime, the loss of human life and infrastructure will be reduced. During military operations, the state of air defense is no longer of such importance for the state authorities, because the authorities are evacuated in the face of threats, because they are the greatest asset of the nation. In the case of combat operations, the standardization of arms systems is the basis for logistical security. The purchase of rocket equipment for half an hour of combat is pointless, because, during this time, there will be no direct contact with the opponent, while the potential opponent probably has supplies for many hours of combat activities. If it is planned to start combat operations on its own, it makes sense, because, after the firing of the first volley, there will be no more.
    [Show full text]
  • Local 45'S Brown Wins National Apprentice Competition Boilermakers Share in $12 Million Fluor Daniel Settlement
    Vol. 48 No. 4 Oct • Dec 2009 The Official Publication of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers, and Helpers, AFL-CIO http://capwiz.com/boilermaker http://www.boilermakers.org IN THESE PAGES MOST Tripartite Conference...... 2 Twelve million dollars is big money, as this mock, oversized check symbolizes. Celebrating the record settlement are, l. to r., IVP-ISO Warren Fairley, Blake & Uhlig attorney Mike Stapp, IP Newton Jones, ED-CSO Kyle Evenson, United Association Asst. Gen. Pres. Stephen Kelly, IVP-WS Tom Baca, and IST Bill Creeden. IBB hosts USA shoot ..............7 Boilermakers share in $12 million Fluor Daniel settlement History-making payment ing the company discriminated but which does not have a sub- ends nearly two decades against union members in Ken- stantial or direct interest. of litigation over antiunion tucky, Louisiana, and Arizona in A total of 167 union members violation of the National Labor will receive back pay and inter- hiring practices in Relations Act (NLRA). est payments ranging from $8,000 construction industry The two other charging parties to $217,000. include the International Broth- “The 2009 settlement agree- INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT erhood of Electrical Workers ment ends nearly two decades of L-1814 sends off New York ..... Newton B. Jones announced in (IBEW) and the United Associa- litigation involving Fluor Daniel’s 12 October that 50 Boilermakers tion of Journeymen and Appren- refusal to hire voluntary union will share in a record $12 million tices of the Plumbing and Pipe organizers,” said Jones. settlement with Fluor Daniel Inc. Fitting Industry (UA). A fourth “This is a substantial amount over the firm’s antiunion hiring union, the United Brotherhood of of money, and all of it will be practices.
    [Show full text]
  • New Navy Flattop Heralds Next Carrier Class
    Related Articles New Navy Flattop Heralds Next Carrier Class by Harold Kennedy At the mouth of the historic Chesapeake Bay-near the site of the nation's first English-speaking colony and several battles of the Revolutionary and Civil Wars-plans are being laid for a major centerpiece of U.S. naval power for the 21st century. The Newport News Shipbuilding company, of Newport News, Va., is under contract with the U.S. Navy to begin the design process for a new nuclear aircraft carrier-the last of the Nimitz class of ships, intended to last through the better part of the century ahead. The new carrier, known only as CVN 77, has yet to be named. Construction will not even begin until fiscal year 2001, with completion scheduled for 2008. Both Newport News and the Navy view CVN 77 as the bridge between the current Nimitz class and a whole new generation of carriers, known as CVNX. Thus, to a large extent, officials told National Defense, the fate of the 114-year-old Newport News shipyard and future U.S. naval clout may depend upon the success of this project. It may seem unlikely that so much could depend upon a single ship, they said, but a nuclear aircraft carrier is no ordinary ship. The firepower of just one U.S. carrier-with 80 heavily armed aircraft-is equal to that of the entire air force of many countries. "The first question any president asks during a crisis is: 'Where is the closest carrier?'" said Robert C. Klosterman, manager of the new Virginia Advanced Shipbuilding and Carrier Integration Center, a joint effort between the state of Virginia, the city of Newport News and Newport News Shipbuilding.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 41/Monday, March 2, 2020/Notices
    Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 41 / Monday, March 2, 2020 / Notices 12271 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3 may be accessed at ACTION: Arms sales notice. of Executive Order 13891 requires www.nationalservice.gov/guidance on federal agencies to ‘‘establish or or after February 28, 2020. SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is maintain on its website a single, (Authority: E.O. 13891, 84 FR 55,235; OMB publishing the unclassified text of an searchable, indexed database that Memorandum M–20–02) arms sales notification. contains or links to all guidance documents in effect from such agency or Dated: February 24, 2020. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: component.’’ Executive Order 13891, 84 Amy Borgstrom, Karma Job at [email protected] or (703) 697–8976. FR 55,235 (October 9, 2019). Associate Director of Policy. Question 1 of OMB Memorandum M– [FR Doc. 2020–04226 Filed 2–28–20; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 20–02 further requires agencies to ‘‘send BILLING CODE 6050–28–P 36(b)(1) arms sales notification is to the Federal Register a notice published to fulfill the requirements of announcing the existence of the new section 155 of Public Law 104–164 guidance portal and explaining that all dated July 21, 1996. The following is a DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE guidance documents remaining in effect copy of a letter to the Speaker of the are contained on the new guidance House of Representatives, Transmittal portal.’’ OMB Memorandum M–20–02 Office of the Secretary 19–55, Policy Justification and (October 31, 2019). [Transmittal No. 19–55] Sensitivity of Technology.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Us Anti-Satellite Weapons '
    CASE STUDY 1 THE HISTORY OF US ANTI-SATELLITE WEAPONS ':.: THE HISTORY OF US ANTISATELLITE WEAPON SYSTEMS ---------------------------------------------- Contents I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. THE HISTORY OF US AND SOVIET ASAT PROGRAMS AND OF DIPLOMATIC INTERACTIONS 4 1) The General Context, The Genesis of Ideas and the Derivation of US Programs 4 2) Orbital Nuclear Weapons, The USSR Threat, US Concept Studies and Early Negotiations (1962-1963) 9 3) US Antisatellite Programs 13 4) The USSR Antisatellite Program, 1968 to the Present 27 5) US-USSR Negotiations for ASAT Control (1977-1979) 35 III. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS 42 IV. REFERENCES AND NOTES 53 V• TABLES AND FIGURES 66 VI • APPENDICES 1 ) US Satellite Monitoring and Tracking Systems 81 2) The X-20, DYNA-SOAR 88 3) Other Lifting Body Reentry Vehicles 96 4) The Space Shuttle 100 5) "Space Denia1" (1958-1963) 104 - 1 - I. INTRODUCTION The military significance of antisatellite (ASAT) systems is in the importance of the capabilities that they threaten. The uses of satellites in support of military programs has burgeoned into an ever increasing number of areas. Reconnaissance satellites provide information on the location and numbers of strategic weapons, the disposition of fleets and strike forces, and the deployment of tactical forces in wartime. Communi­ cations satellites provide enormously enhanced command-and-control capa­ bilities in the disposition of one's forces. Early-warning systems alert one to the launch of the opponent's strategic missiles. Geodetic satellites provide information for the targeting of one's own weapons· and the improve­ ment of their accuracy. Weather satellites aid fleets to hide under cover and aircraft to improve their routes to targets or destinations.
    [Show full text]
  • Countermeasures.Pdf
    Countermeasures Study group organized by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Countermeasures A Technical Evaluation of the Operational Effectiveness of the Planned US National Missile Defense System Andrew M. Sessler (Chair of the Study Group), John M. Cornwall, Bob Dietz, Steve Fetter, Sherman Frankel, Richard L. Garwin, Kurt Gottfried, Lisbeth Gronlund, George N. Lewis, Theodore A. Postol, David C. Wright April 2000 Union of Concerned Scientists MIT Security Studies Program © 2000 Union of Concerned Scientists Acknowledgments All rights reserved The authors would like to thank Tom Collina, Stuart Kiang, Matthew Meselson, and Jeremy Broughton for their comments and assistance. The authors owe a special note of The Union of Concerned Scientists is a partnership of citizens and gratitude to Eryn MacDonald scientists working to build a cleaner environment and a safer world. For and Anita Spiess for their more information about UCS’s work on arms control and international contributions and dedication, security, visit the UCS website at www.ucsusa.org. without which this report The Security Studies Program (SSP) is a graduate-level research and would not have been possible. educational program based at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for International Studies. The program’s primary task is educating the next generation of scholars and practitioners in This report and its dissemina- international security policymaking. SSP supports the research work of graduate students, faculty, and fellows, and sponsors seminars, confer- tion were funded in part by ences, and publications to bring its teaching and research results to the grants to the Union of Con- attention of wider audiences.
    [Show full text]