By Trefor Moss
SINGAPORE--Surging military spending across Asia has made it the
world's second-biggest region for such spending over the past
decade, but U.S. companies, the biggest sellers of military
equipment, are struggling to take full advantage of that growth,
even as revenues back home stagnate.
Demand in Asia for defense equipment--and calls for greater U.S.
military involvement--have grown as China's display of military
might in the South China Sea intensifies regional tensions.
Total global spending on defense in 2014 was $1.719 trillion, of
which Asia and Oceania contributed $423 billion, or 25%, behind
only North America's $596 billion, according to the Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute. The figures are calculated
using a 2011 base dollar value.
The total for Asia was over $30 billion more than Europe, which
it leapfrogged for the No. 2 spot compared with the previous
10-year period, and up 62% over the past decade. China--a closed
market for U.S. defense companies because of a long-standing arms
embargo--accounted for $208 billion of the Asia and Oceania total,
spurring its neighbors to boost their spending. Asia and Oceania
bought 48% of the weaponry that U.S. companies exported during that
period, up from 39% in 2009.
But capitalizing on that boom has proved difficult for U.S.
defense companies, which are struggling to dominate Asia's
important emerging markets as they once did. Many of their weapons
systems are too expensive and unnecessarily sophisticated for those
customers. There is also more competition from upstarts and
established European competitors better able to meet Asia's defense
needs.
Some of the Asian manufacturers are big exporters, such as
Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co. of South Korea.
But many others are small compared with U.S. giants such as Boeing
Co. Indonesian state-run aerospace company PT Dirgantara said it
has sold a maritime-patrol aircraft, which its executives said was
the least expensive on the market, to eight countries so far,
including South Korea, which bought four of the Indonesian planes
for $92 million. Singapore Technologies Engineering Ltd. recently
sold an amphibious warship to Thailand in an order valued at $135
million.
By comparison, Boeing's P-8A Poseidon surveillance aircraft
costs about $220 million each. The company has sold eight of these
planes to India for $2.1 billion.
In the 1970s, practically every air force in East Asia was
stocked with U.S. warplanes such as the Northrop F-5, a
small-budget jet built with exports in mind.
Today, among the 10 states of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations, only Singapore has new U.S. jets. None have modern U.S.
warships. Once-reliable U.S. customers, such as Thailand, Indonesia
and the Philippines, are turning to companies elsewhere for arms,
in some cases rejecting U.S. alternatives.
This is partly because U.S. defense companies now develop
big-ticket, cutting-edge products in response to the needs of their
biggest customer, the U.S. military, but which many Asian countries
don't need, say some U.S. contractors active in Asia.
"We're often perceived as a Cadillac option in the
Asia-Pacific," said Howard Berry, Boeing's vice president for
international sales of the F/A-18 Super Hornet, which the company
is currently marketing in Malaysia.
The U.S. aerospace industry's premium export product is the
Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 joint strike fighter, a stealth jet
designed to pierce enemy defenses and stay undetected during
operations. But the F-35 is too sophisticated for most Asian
buyers, which generally just want a working military deterrent,
and--at roughly $125 million a plane--the plane is unaffordable to
most of them.
Big-spending nations such as Japan and South Korea are the only
F-35 buyers in the region, with each paying more than $7 billion
for about 40 jets apiece.
"They can't turn on a dime and suddenly come up with foreign
products," said Richard Bitzinger of the S. Rajaratnam School of
International Studies in Singapore.
In sticking to their high-end strategy, the U.S. companies might
be missing an opportunity to help secure their futures. Joe Katzman
of U.S.-based KAT Consulting, criticized U.S. companies for
"gold-plating" weapons systems to satisfy only top-end clients,
while neglecting emerging markets seeking more accessible
options.
"Abandoning the low end eliminates new value buyers," said Mr.
Katzman. He added that the practice cedes emerging markets to
defense-industry rivals, who then capitalize 10 years down the line
once those countries have fully ramped up their spending.
The U.S. companies could use a reliable growth source: The U.S.
budgeted about $560 billion for defense in 2015, down from a peak
of $721 billion four years earlier. During that time, revenues have
stagnated at the big U.S. defense companies.
Munitions manufacturer Raytheon Co., for example, reported
revenue of $22.8 billion in 2014, down from $25.2 billion in 2010.
Lockheed Martin booked net sales of $45.6 billion last year, the
same as four years earlier.
The 10 Asean countries, meanwhile, are set to spend a total of
about $40 billion this year--about the same as India--up from
roughly $33 billion in 2010, and are set to spend $52 billion by
2020, according to IHS Jane's, a defense-information company.
In some cases, U.S. companies don't offer products in classes
the Asian countries can buy. U.S. companies are missing out
entirely on an Asian boom in submarines, for example, because they
don't build the diesel-fueled submarines Asian customers want.
Instead they build nuclear submarines that appeal to global navies.
European, South Korean and Russian submarine makers have all landed
multibillion-dollar contracts for new boats in India, Indonesia,
Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam in recent years.
To be sure, U.S. companies still capture a large share of global
military spending: U.S. suppliers had 31% of the world market
between 2010 and 2014, according to SIPRI. And they often supply
technology that underlies complex systems sold by competitors.
Emerging aircraft manufacturer Korean Aerospace Industries Ltd.,
for example, recently secured orders from Indonesia and the
Philippines for its new T-50 trainer/light fighter aircraft--but
the plane was co-developed with Lockheed Martin, and includes U.S.
equipment from companies such as Honeywell International Inc.,
Rockwell Collins Inc. and Raytheon.
"We see the emergence of Asian [airplane manufacturers] as an
opportunity, not a threat," said Mark Burgess, Honeywell's senior
director for Asia-Pacific defense and space systems, adding that
his company considers only its European counterparts as genuine
rivals.
Similarly, new warships being built by Australia and South Korea
have Lockheed Martin's Aegis Combat Management System at their
core.
"It just doesn't make sense for them to try to develop a
complex, expensive system like that indigenously," Mr. Bitzinger
said.
Write to Trefor Moss at Trefor.Moss@wsj.com
Access Investor Kit for Singapore Technologies Engineering
Ltd.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=SG1F60858221
Access Investor Kit for The Boeing Co.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US0970231058
Access Investor Kit for Honeywell International, Inc.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US4385161066
Access Investor Kit for Lockheed Martin Corp.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US5398301094
Access Investor Kit for Rockwell Collins, Inc.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US7743411016
Access Investor Kit for Singapore Technologies Engineering
Ltd.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US82929Y1010
Subscribe to WSJ: http://online.wsj.com?mod=djnwires