Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Please Support CounterPunch’s Annual Fund Drive
We don’t run corporate ads. We don’t shake our readers down for money every month or every quarter like some other sites out there. We only ask you once a year, but when we ask we mean it. So, please, help as much as you can. We provide our site for free to all, but the bandwidth we pay to do so doesn’t come cheap. All contributions are tax-deductible.

Dumping on the F-35: Trump, Waste and the Military Industrial Complex

That particular fighter never had good press.  Even before Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Joint Strategic Fighter attracted the ire of Donald Trump via his usual, belching medium, Twitter, the project was flailing in a swamp to the value of $400 billion.

On Monday, Trump tweeted that Lockheed’s “F-35 program and cost is out of control. Billions of dollars can and will be saved on military (and other) purchases after January 20th.” But the stock prices of the company were already falling, providing a faint whiff of insider trading. Had Trump tipped off someone about his target company?[1] (Not that he needed to – a deeper analysis would have already shown the company to be taking a hit.)

Whatever the case, the remarks stunned and burned those connected with the bloated military enterprise that is Lockheed Martin. Stocks fell. The hedge fund managers proceeded to finalise what they had already started.  All in all, 4 per cent of the stock had been shed in early trade. Other military stocks also purged some value.

The President-elect was at it again, rubbishing parts of US industry (and a fine, killing industry at that) in an effort to make America great again.  Bloated, wasteful, obese – this was the predicament facing a fighter that was meant to have everything going for it, a consortium driven enterprise that was meant to revolutionise future combat.

The tally board for the F-35 is poor, and has stirred some dissent.  Washington’s allies have not all been pleased, despite assurances that the mammary glands of Mother Empire have been doing their trick.

Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, has been mixed. “I do hear that it’s not very good.  I’m hearing that our existing planes are better.  And one of the pilots came out of the plane, one of the test pilots, and said ‘this isn’t as good as what we already have’.”[2]

That said, Trudeau will still consider the F-35, provided it goes to an open competition.  “It’s an open and transparent competition we’re going to be engaged in and the various aircraft and aircraft producers will have an opportunity to make their best case.”[3]

Other than that, Lockheed has not topped of the list of procurements by the Canadian government, which provided a notable snub in November by revealing plans to purchase 18 Boeing Corp Super Hornets as an interim measure.

Australia’s officials, characteristically confused, have managed to dig themselves into the mire of a contract that will drain more than provide.  Despite reservations by some former Defence Force members at Canberra’s plans to acquire 72 F-35s, the Chief of the Royal Australian Air Force, Air Marshal Leo Davies, spoke with hoodwinked confidence in having “absolutely no reservations, zero reservations, about the decision for the Joint Strike Fighter being the Classic Hornet replacement for Australia.”[4]

In a fascinating sense, the Joint Strategic Fighter has become, not merely an economic target but a cultural one, attacked for being a product of establishment deception and conventional cronyism. Outsider Trump, not exactly squeaky clean himself, is rallying as the critic of insider rot, insisting that there be a “lifetime restriction” on high ranking Pentagon officials in working for defence contractors.

In an interview for Fox News Sunday, Trump outlined a philosophy of defence establishment cleaning.  “The people that are making these deals for the government, they should never be allowed to go work for these companies.”[5]

The Pentagon, not without reason, is deemed untrustworthy with its projections, cooking the defence books and diligently covering tracks. This incentive is also assisted by the seemingly inextricable ties between defence contractors and former Pentagon employees.

The Government Accountability Office, in 2008, noted the sheer scope of these links, though it did also identify post-government employment restrictions. “In 2006, 52 contractors employed 2,435 former DOD senior acquisition officials who had previously served as generals, admirals, senior executives, program managers, contracting officers, or in other acquisition positions which made them subject to restrictions on their post-DOD employment.”[6]

Well and good – but for the fact that the GAO had to admit to “a significant under-reporting of the contractors’ employment of former DOD officials.”  Employment restrictions in the private sector after life in the Pentagon, in other words, is not always a rigorously policed thing.

These particular arrangements have now been aired by the property tycoon cum president-elect, one who knows a thing or two about inventive accounting and fictitious projections.  To that can be added the very definition of conflict of interest.  It takes a deeply accomplished sinner to know one.

Found short on performance but long on budget, the backers of the F-35 have become prime targets for the Trump show.  Jeff Babione, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 program manager, has insisted that trimming has taken place, though he has taken the back route in explaining the company strategy.

“Since the beginning, we have invested hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars to reduce the price of the airplane by about 70 per cent since it original costing”.  Money must be spent in order to reduce the money that needs to be spent, a delightful example of convoluted military speak.

That sort of talk has the demagogues up in arms.  They want results.  Killing machines that perform and are made according to budget are desired in the name of both populism and effectiveness.

In many senses, this is the counter-intuitive nature of the Military Industrial Complex, which has historically favoured the illusion of appropriate yet extortionately expensive defence in the face of global phantom enemies.  But this is the sort of administrative scuffle that may well see the shelving of one of the less glorious products in US air history.








More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email:

October 15, 2018
Rob Urie
Climate Crisis is Upon Us
Conn Hallinan
Syria’s Chessboard
Patrick Cockburn
The Saudi Atrocities in Yemen are a Worse Story Than the Disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi
Sheldon Richman
Trump’s Middle East Delusions Persist
Justin T. McPhee
Uberrima Fides? Witness K, East Timor and the Economy of Espionage
Tom Gill
Spain’s Left Turn?
Jeff Cohen
Few Democrats Offer Alternatives to War-Weary Voters
Dean Baker
Corporate Debt Scares
Gary Leupp
The Khashoggi Affair and and the Anti-Iran Axis
Russell Mokhiber
Sarah Chayes Calls on West Virginians to Write In No More Manchins
Clark T. Scott
Acclimated Behaviorisms
Kary Love
Evolution of Religion
Colin Todhunter
From GM Potatoes to Glyphosate: Regulatory Delinquency and Toxic Agriculture
Binoy Kampmark
Evacuating Nauru: Médecins Sans Frontières and Australia’s Refugee Dilemma
Marvin Kitman
The Kitman Plan for Peace in the Middle East: Two Proposals
Weekend Edition
October 12, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Becky Grant
My History with Alexander Cockburn and The Financial Future of CounterPunch
Paul Street
For Popular Sovereignty, Beyond Absurdity
Nick Pemberton
The Colonial Pantsuit: What We Didn’t Want to Know About Africa
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Summer of No Return
Jeff Halper
Choices Made: From Zionist Settler Colonialism to Decolonization
Gary Leupp
The Khashoggi Incident: Trump’s Special Relationship With the Saudi Monarchy
Andrew Levine
Democrats: Boost, Knock, Enthuse
Barbara Kantz
The Deportation Crisis: Report From Long Island
Doug Johnson
Nate Silver and 538’s Measurable 3.5% Democratic Bias and the 2018 House Race
Gwen Carr
This Stops Today: Seeking Justice for My Son Eric Garner
Robert Hunziker
Peak Carbon Emissions By 2020, or Else!
Arshad Khan
Is There Hope on a World Warming at 1.5 Degrees Celsius?
David Rosen
Packing the Supreme Court in the 21stCentury
Brian Cloughley
Trump’s Threats of Death and Destruction
Joel A. Harrison
The Case for a Non-Profit Single-Payer Healthcare System
Ramzy Baroud
That Single Line of Blood: Nassir al-Mosabeh and Mohammed al-Durrah
Zhivko Illeieff
Addiction and Microtargeting: How “Social” Networks Expose us to Manipulation
What is Truth?
Michael Doliner
Were the Constitution and the Bill of Rights a Mistake?
Victor Grossman
Cassandra Calls
Ralph E. Shaffer
Could Kavanaugh’s Confirmation Hearing Ended Differently?
Vanessa Cid
Our Everyday Family Separations
Walaa Al Ghussein
The Risks of Being a Journalist in Gaza
Ron Jacobs
Betrayal and Treachery—The Extremism of Moderates
James Munson
Identity Politics and the Ruling Class
P. Sainath
The Floods of Kerala: the Bank That Went Under…Almost
Ariel Dorfman
How We Roasted Donald Duck, Disney’s Agent of Imperialism
Joe Emersberger
Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno’s Assault on Human Rights and Judicial Independence
Ed Meek
White Victimhood: Brett Kavanaugh and the New GOP Brand
Andrew McLean, MD
A Call for “Open Space”