Exists in a cost-driven competitive environment.
Is constrained in profit by a large set of regulations. Profit is based on cost, not price, except in international sales.
Reluctantly accepts regulation as a demand of the public, but feels the bureaucracy is out of control.
Competitiveness dictated by law blocks collective demand for reform.
Feels laws which restrict personnel movement from business to government sector have significantly impacted capability of DOD personnel.
Has no consensus perspective on dual-use technology export policy.
Finally, government participation in the economic condition of the U.S. has varied significantly. While regulation has grown, impacting detailed costs of business (1980-1990), at the same time deregulation (meaning more competition) of the communications industry has been a significant change, and our current executive branch has a hands off attitude (i.e, no industrial policy) which is at a peak right now.
This is in contrast to the government participation during the pre World War II era. In the author's opinion, the CIS needs to understand that our current long term economic condition is fundamental to our attitude toward control (or non-control) of dual-use technologies, and on our attitude toward the role of government in our free market system.
As a first step toward recommendations concerning control of dual-use technologies, we need to understand which technologies will be most critical considering the most likely threats to the United States (the author believes these bear a strong resemblance to those facing the CIS); and which part of the industrial base (commercial or defense) is currently providing leadership in that technology area.