In a globalizing economy, the U.S. is increasingly reliant on foreign suppliers of military hardware. This relationship can be beneficial both to America and its foreign company partners, but only if the latter can be trusted to be honest vendors and fair competitors worthy of a stake in U.S. national security.

A new paper, published by the Center for Security Policy, argues that the recent large scale introduction of one these foreign firms -- European defense conglomerate EADS -- poses exactly this sort of serious security issue.

The paper is entitled "EADS is Welcome to Compete for U.S. Defense Contracts -- But First It Must Clean Up Its Act," and it lays out several issues that ought to make Americans skeptical about whether EADS can function as an honest, scrupulous U.S. defense partner.

First, the European governments that own/sponsor the company have a history of spying on America and stealing trade secrets from U.S. companies.  This illicit behavior is even worse when coupled with EADS long history of bribery and corruption.

Second, the Russian government, which has displayed a growing hostility toward the U.S., is a part owner in EADS and is working to increase it share of the companys stock to 20% or more. This would give Putins government the ability to manipulate the company, and perhaps even control it.

Third, EADS is one of Europes largest employers of militantly anti-U.S. labor unions (see attached picture). Many of these unions actively work against U.S. security and foreign policy while EADS continues to profess its desire to partner with the Pentagon.

Fourth, EADS actively seeks to circumvent counterproliferation regimes by selling military hardware, over Washingtons objections, to current and potential U.S. adversaries. EADS has even been implicated as being unwittingly involved in an Iranian purchase of nuclear weapons technology.

The bottom line, according to the paper, is that while EADS has the potential to be a valuable partner in U.S. defense and security, it will need to change its ways before American policy makers can trust it, and American tax payers can be assured they are getting the best product for their money. (Source: Center for Security Policy)