In the era of Trump 2.0, the first question British defence companies are facing when trying to export their weapons abroad is whether they are independent of the US arms industry. Or simply, are they “Itar-free”?
Itar, which stands for the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, refers to a set of longstanding US rules that govern the items on the United States Munitions List, which is aimed at safeguarding national security.
The list contains US-produced software, components and other technology that can be used for either military purposes or serve a dual use. If a weapon is subject to Itar, it cannot be built, sold or supplied to someone else without US consent and support.
One defence industry source said: “Even if you have US engineers, you become Itar-tainted.”
To employ ex-US military employees, UK companies would become subject to Itar restrictions if they have not been granted an exemption.
Although the restrictions are nothing new, a combination of Trump’s tariffs, vague threats to Canada and Denmark and pause on providing military aid and intelligence to Ukraine has left defence companies and governments thinking twice before investing in American components or equipment.
...
Helsing, a European defence tech company, and Auterion, a supplier of drone operating systems with a European headquarters in Munich, also pride themselves on having Itar-free equipment.
Helsing has pursued the policy because it “was founded on the principle of providing sovereign capabilities for a strong Europe”, according to Amelia Gould, the company’s global maritime director.
“Europe has this technology, we don’t need to import everything from the US,” she added.
Brinley Salzmann, the director of overseas and exports for ADS, a defence trade association, said that what was once a preference for Itar-free weapons was quickly becoming a requirement.
He said: “As international collaboration increases and governments seek greater control over their supply chains, the ability to operate without US extraterritorial export restrictions is becoming a strategic consideration.”
...
... and then they haven't even started about kill switches.
Kill switches are almost entirely a misconception, as far as I understand it. What's far more dangerous with US defence products is reliance on them for spare parts, repairs and upgrades. Piss off the US in some way, your very very expensive aircraft no longer gets spare parts, plane can't fly safely, it's functionally useless.
Not having essential parts basically works like a kill switch, so we're screwed either way. If EU governments do similar purchases now they would be real stupid.