U.S. May Build Subs in Israel

By Magda Abu Fadil

Congressional and Administration officials are trying to avoid an all-out confrontation over the U.S. Navy's plan to build, in Israel, three diesel-powered submarines for the Israeli Navy.

The issue has pitted Navy Secretary John Lehman against members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, some of whom are uneasy over the prospect of creating business and jobs in Israel at the expense of shipbuilders in the U.S. In May, an amendment was attached to the House's version of the FY 1986 defense authorization bill that would prohibit the Navy from subsidizing construction of submarines abroad or from blocking their construction in the U.S. The amendment, sponsored by Rep. G. William Whitehurst (R-VA), was approved by the House Armed Services Committee by a vote of 37 to 8.

Navy Secretary Lehman, while on a trip to Israel this past April, struck a preliminary agreement with Israel to build the subs as part of a joint program to cut costs in modernizing both countries' navies. Secretary Lehman announced during his visit that he had initialed another agreement "to jointly develop and produce a new missile," as well as new patrol boats.

Israel now has three submarines of its own, and wanted to purchase three more American-made subs. But last year Navy Secretary Lehman turned down Israel's request, fearing that new construction of diesel submarines in the U.S. would tempt Congress to purchase more of the subs for the U.S. Navy. The Navy has long opposed adding more diesel subs to its fleets, preferring instead the more versatile, but also more expensive, nuclear-powered vessels.

The proposed plan to build the subs in Israel would appear to be a tidy arrangement whereby Secretary Lehman's fears would be lessened, while Israel's fortunes would be increased. Israel not only would get work for its Haifa shipyard, but it also would probably be granted an exemption from U.S. foreign aid policies, which require recipients of U.S. military assistance to spend the money on weapons made in the U.S.

Gwen Perry, an aide to Rep. Whitehurst, said that his objections to building the subs in Israel were based purely on economic reasons. "Before we give another country the funds we should look at our own ailing ship-building industry," she argued. Ms. Perry said she was unaware of any attempts by pro-Israel lobbyists to reverse the vote in the House Armed Services Committee excluding Israel from the construction process.

Another congressional source said: "There's not much enthusiasm on the Hill for spending $300 million a pop in Israeli shipyards." (That figure is the estimated cost of building the subs over a six-to seven-year period.) This source described Secretary Lehman as being on a "personal crusade" to win congressional acceptance of the plan.

A congressional defense expert, speaking on background, said the Senate Armed Services Committee had an interest in finding new markets abroad to help the U.S.'s ship-building industry. But the Navy, he said, feared the release of military secrets to other nations through the transfer of technology. Last year the Armed Services Committee asked the Navy to provide a report on the security considerations of building subs in the U.S. for export. "Under extreme duress the Navy delivered the report the last week of May," the congressional source said, some seven months late. He added that there had been "enormous bureaucratic infighting" over the report, and that Secretary Lehman and the chief of naval operations were adamant about forging ahead with the agreement with Israel, come what may.

Recently, there has been debate in both the House and Senate over their respective versions of the defense authorization bill. A conference committee is expected to meet the week of June 24 to iron out differences between them.

Magda Abu Fadil is editor of Middle East Affairs News Service in Washington, D.C.