Why It Matters
The United States and four allies have a shared framework for defense research and production, but analysts say it has not achieved the integration Congress envisioned.
A Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on the National Technology and Industrial Base (NTIB) says the framework seeks to integrate the defense industries of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. Some analysts say those industrial bases "are not meaningfully unified" and have fallen short of the "seamless integration" called for in the fiscal 2017 National Defense Authorization Act. The report said domestic sourcing requirements may conflict with integration goals, while U.S. export controls, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), may present additional barriers.
The Big Picture
The NTIB's origins trace to the post-Cold War drawdown. The fiscal 1993 National Defense Authorization Act codified the framework when it covered only the U.S. and Canada. Congress expanded it to the U.K. and Australia in the fiscal 2017 NDAA and New Zealand in the fiscal 2023 NDAA.
The report said the U.S. share of global research and development expenditures fell from approximately 69% in 1960 to about 30% in 2022, reflecting faster investment growth elsewhere rather than declining U.S. investment. NTIB membership carries statutory procurement preferences and potential exemptions from some National Industrial Security Program requirements, but the Buy American Act, Byrnes-Tollefson Amendment, and small-business set-asides may conflict with cross-border integration goals.
ITAR may present another barrier. Canada has licensing exemptions, although they do not cover all controlled items. The U.K. and Australia have bilateral treaties providing limited exemptions, while other NTIB members do not have uniformly available exemptions. The fiscal 2026 National Defense Authorization Act directs the Department of Defense to convene a working group to study "the feasibility and advisability of including Israel" in the NTIB. CRS describes this as a study directive and does not report an outcome.
The Bottom Line
The report identified options for Congress including amending technology-transfer, domestic-preference and export-control laws; using the NTIB to expand cooperation on emerging commercial technologies; and directing DOD to better coordinate international defense cooperation mechanisms. It also cautioned that expanding membership may require existing members' concurrence, could complicate coordination, and may create unforeseen national security risks. Whether Congress pursues those options, and whether the Trump administration's defense and acquisition policies address the integration barriers CRS identifies, remains unresolved.
Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights
Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article