The recent agreement signed between the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) and the United States of America (USA) has apparently become the most devoured topic for some moribund politicians in the country. Illusionary fears are observed being put about to the public through an absurd campaign orchestrated by the said political elements. The defence.lk, consulted senior Defence Ministry Officials and got their clarifications on the facts and fallacies surrounding the said agreement.
The Acquisition and Cross Service Agreement (ACSA) is a term used when a country comes to an agreement with the USA to exchange Logistics, Support, Supplies and Services (LSSS) between their armed forces on request. It is a simple and relatively cost effective method of exchanging goods and services between the armed forces of the two countries. Over 80 countries have already signed ACSAs since it provides ample benefits to the both parties without affecting the country's independence or political alliance. The ACSA is defined by the US Department of Defence as follows:
"An agreement under which the United States agrees to provide Logistic Support, Supplies and Services to Military Forces of a qualifying Country or Organization...in return for the reciprocal provision of logistic support , supplies and services by such government or organization to the element of the (United States) armed forces"
As per the above definition one can realize that ACSA does not amounts to an alliance or a treaty between the two governments. It is a simple arrangement between the governments to exchange goods and services for their armed forces in a more collaborative environment. The following clarifications would be helpful for the viewers get the gist of it:
i. How does the ACSA operate?
Once the agreement comes in to force, either government can indicate its requirement in a prescribed form to the other. Yet, the requirements permitted to be fulfilled under the ACSA entail LSSS only. In other words, the ACSA can be used to acquire foods and medical supplies but not a fighter aircraft or other major end weapons.
On the receipt of the request, the recipient may review the request and should decide whether or not it can fulfil the requested requirement. The order should be mutually agreeable and consistent with each party's priorities. Further, The ACSA does not place any obligations on the number or value of transaction to be provided by either party. Any transaction may be declined by the potential provider as deemed necessary.
If the request is accepted, the order is countersigned; the goods or services are delivered or provided; and the participants have a specified period of time from billing date to reconcile date.
ii. What are the methods of payments?
It should be noted that the ACSA does not aim at making or receiving donations. What has been obtained should be paid within reasonable time according to the agreed terms. However, ACSA transaction does not aim at making additional profits too. The agreement requires the participant to charge each other what they charge themselves. This gives both parties a substantial cost benefit by reducing overheads. In other words, lowest rates applied to the Defence Ministry will be charged form the recipient (USA), not the usual higher rates applied for the foreign military sales (FMS).
The ACSA permits three types of transactions.
a. Cash- The first option is the standard cash transactions. If SL provides Rs.1 million worth of food to US troops engaged in an exercise, the US settle the amount by paying the same amount to SL in cash.
b. Replacement in Kind (RIK)- Here, if SL forces in a foreign mission get USD 10,000 worth of fuel for vehicles , the GoSL can settle that amount by providing fuel worth of the same amount to the US ships coming to Colombo harbour.
c. Equal Value Exchange (EVE) - The final and the most complicated option is the EVE. This method enables the participants to exchange different goods and services of equal worth. For example, if SL provides Rs.1 million worth of food to the US troops, the US may provide medicines of equal worth to SL and settle the above amount.
iii. Does the ACSA hinder independence of SL?
NO. ACSA by no means permit permanent presence of US troops in the host country. It is not a basing or access agreement for the foreign troops either. Having an ACSA also does not compel SL to support or make an alliance with the US in its role in the international scene or to commit SL forces for US military operations. The agreement gives the complete freedom for the parties to decline any order as deemed necessary, but continuous declination of routine orders may damage the reciprocal nature of the agreement.
iv. What is allowed and not allowed by the ACSA terms?
The ACSA allows the participants to exchange following goods and services between the armed forces as the needs arise:
a. Transportation facilities.
b. Petroleum, Oil and Lubricants (POL)
c. Ports facilities
d. Billeting (accommodation)
e. Training
f. Clothing and Food
g. Spare parts, repair and maintenance facilities.
h. Communication facilities
i. Base operation support
j. Storage facilities
k. Medical facilities
The ACSA prohibits the exchange of the following goods and services:
a. Major end items: (Ex: Fighter aircraft, Missiles, Bombs, Gunship, and etc.)
b. Weapon systems: (Ex: Guidance systems for Missiles/Torpedoes/Aerial bombs and naval guns.)
c. Deterrent systems: (Ex: chaffs and chaff dispensers)
d. Nuclear and Chemical ammunition
vi. Does ACSA put an additional burden on SL defence funds?
NO. The ACSA is only an arrangement to fulfil routine needs of urgent nature that arise in time-critical missions. It does not permit either party to artificially increase own stocks anticipating future requests form the other. In other words, ACSA is not an option to cater for "planned" requests or an alternative to FMS. The governments may still transact via FMS for both planned needs that comes under and beyond the ACSA, according to the situation.
The main idea of having an ACSA is to reduce the additional costs and the time consuming red tapes involved with the FMS procedures and thereby to increase the efficiency of the transactions.
v. Does ACSA invite US peace keeping force to involve in SL wars?
NO. This is the most absurd fear spread by the opportunistic politicians. The ACSA refers only to the exchange of logistics but by no means does it refer to exchange of manpower or military power. In other words, the ACSA does not restrict freedom of either country to engage in independent missions and the ACSA may be applied for any such missions with non-conflicting interests of the participants. Furthermore, the ACSA by no way imply that SL troops should be committed to US missions.
The scenarios that the ACSA may be applied are; humanitarian missions, combined training exercises, disaster relief operations , peace keeping operations conducted in foreign countries (Ex: SL forces in Haiti) , a national emergency and etc.
As stated earlier, the ACSA is only an arrangement that authorised the US government and foreign nations to provide mutual logistic support by more flexible and less expensive means outside of normal commercial contracting and FMS channels.
vi. What advantages ACSA provides for SL?
The ACSA is reciprocal and therefore equally beneficial for both parties. The ACSA facilitate SL forces to obtain help form the US in national disasters and crisis situations. It also allows the SL forces to participate in combined training exercises with lesser cost. Further, having an ACSA strengthens the diplomatic ties and confidence between SL and the USA.
vii. What are the past examples of the ACSA in use?
a. Thailand provided support services (POL and billeting) to the US forces during Cobra Gold exercise (cash).
b. US provided riot control gear to Australia (RIK).
c. US provided food to French navy during Tsunami relief operations (Cash).
d. US provided the UK cots, beddings and tents to support the Montserrat volcano evacuation (cash).
e. US supplied fire fighting equipment to Malaysia to support fighting the Indonesian forest fires (RIK).
f. US provided body armour to the Philippines (EVE).
The USA has been a long standing friend of SL who had contributed immensely to the country's development as well as to her war against terrorism. One does not have to go very far in the history to recall how those opportunistic politicians had "contributed" to the national development and "helped" the security forces to defend the country. Those obsolete political ideologies advocating closed political systems and centralization of every possible phenomenon would not help SL to enter into the new civilization where freedom and justice, minority rights, globalization, decentralization and empowerment are highly valued.
Thus, the time has come for all SL citizens to recognize those forces against county's development. Then only they would realize why certain political elements are floundering hard to mislead people; because such elements will not survive in a developed country.
No comments:
Post a Comment