11 septembre 2009<\/a> nous donne des pr\u00e9cisions int\u00e9ressantes.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t L’article confirme d’abord l’ampleur probable des restrictions budg\u00e9taires du prochain gouvernement, quelle que soit sa couleur politique. (\u00abEven the Institute of Directors and the TaxPayers’ Alliance included big defence cuts in their proposals yesterday to axe \u00a350 billion a year from public spending.<\/em>\u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t L’industrie de d\u00e9fense britannique a peu de chances de pr\u00e9senter un front uni, parce que les int\u00e9r\u00eats sont tr\u00e8s diff\u00e9rents. A part les industries ext\u00e9rieures au syst\u00e8me mais qui attendent des contrats de d\u00e9fense vers les services priv\u00e9s de s\u00e9curit\u00e9, il y a une part importante de cette industrie qui est surtout int\u00e9ress\u00e9e par des contrats d’\u00e9quipements impliquant l’utilisation prolong\u00e9e de plate-formes (navires, avions, etc.), qui seraient r\u00e9\u00e9quip\u00e9es, modernis\u00e9es, etc. (\u00abCompanies such as Thales UK and EADS UK want to break up big contracts so they have a greater opportunity to supply equipment. They would find cost savings by utilising equipment across several different platforms.<\/em>\u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t Face \u00e0 ce groupe de soci\u00e9t\u00e9s, on trouve le groupe BAE qui, lui, pr\u00f4ne \u00e0 l’inverse la concentration sur de nouveaux programmes, c’est-\u00e0-dire les gros contrats que les autres compagnies veulent voir divis\u00e9s en budgets disponibles pour le r\u00e9\u00e9quipement. (\u00abAt the other end of the industry, BAE Systems, Europe’s largest defence company, is taking the most aggressive position as it tries to defend key projects, such as the aircraft carriers and F35 fighters, from cutbacks. BAE believes that it can provide better value for money by taking a greater share of work providing the equipment, electronics, communication systems and long-term servicing.<\/em>\u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tCe r\u00e9sum\u00e9 fort int\u00e9ressant de la situation indique que le pivot central des perspectives de l’industrie de l’armement dans la p\u00e9riode de restriction qui s’ouvre est certainement le JSF. Le porte-avions, \u00e9norme contrat \u00e9galement, est relativement moins expos\u00e9 \u00e0 cause de sa valeur strat\u00e9gique intrins\u00e8que et son adaptabilit\u00e9 \u00e0 diverses configurations et situations. Le cas du JSF est donc promis \u00e0 devenir \u00e9galement politique au Royaume-Uni, dans la mesure de ses implications propres autant que des effets indirects de son choix ou de son abandon, et cela \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re de la situation du programme aux USA. Dans certaines circonstances, la participation du Royaume-Uni au JSF, c’est-\u00e0-dire la commande dans l’\u00e9tat actuel des choses, pourrait devenir le d\u00e9tonateur central d’une \u00e9volution d\u00e9cisive des relations privil\u00e9gi\u00e9es USA-UK, selon la d\u00e9cision prise.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 15 septembre 2009 \u00e0 14H01<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
L’industrie britannique de d\u00e9fense se pr\u00e9pare \u00e0 des r\u00e9ductions budg\u00e9taires importantes. Sa position, autant que les options qu’elle envisage sont int\u00e9ressantes par les orientations politiques qu’elles impliquent. Un court article du Times du 11 septembre 2009 nous donne des pr\u00e9cisions int\u00e9ressantes. L’article confirme d’abord l’ampleur probable des restrictions budg\u00e9taires du prochain gouvernement, quelle que soit… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3792,3019,5386,250,3575,2758],"class_list":["post-71074","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-bae","tag-defense","tag-industrie","tag-jsf","tag-royaume-uni","tag-uk"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71074","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=71074"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71074\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71074"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71074"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71074"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}