1). Exports of computers above a  specific performance level to tier-3 countries such as China, India, Israel,  Pakistan, and Russia require a license. Report Did Not Assess All Potential Uses of Military Significance

As in previous reports used to justify changes in the control threshold, the  December 2001 report did not meet the second criterion of the National  Defense Authorization Act of 1998: to address all potential uses of military  significance to which computers with performance capabilities between  the old control threshold and the new threshold could be applied. The report did not address the difficulty that the U.S. government has  had in effectively monitoring the high performance computers that are  exported to countries of concern. Given the level of high  performance computing power that the United States approves for export,  such studies of the cumulative effect of computer and related technology  exports will be increasingly important in determining the impact of such  exports on U.S. national security and in making future decisions about  adjusting export control thresholds. Scope and Methodology

To assess the President’s justifications for raising the export control  threshold from 85,000 MTOPS to 190,000 MTOPS, we reviewed the  statutory requirements related to the President’s justification and the  regulations that pertain to the export of high performance computers. 2.
What GAO Found

For national security and foreign policy reasons, U.S. export control policy seeks to balance economic interests in promoting high technology exports with national security interests to maintain a military advantage in high performance computers over potential adversaries. In January 2002, the President announced that the control threshold--above which computers exported to countries such as China, India, and Russia--would increase from 85,000 millions of theoretical operations per second (MTOPS) to 190,000 MTOPS. The report justifying the changes in control thresholds for high performance computers focused on the availability of such computers. However, the justification did not fully address the requirements of the National Defense Authorization Act of 1998. The December 2001 report did not address several key issues related to the decision to raise the threshold: (1) the unrestricted export of computers with performance capabilities between the old and new thresholds will allow countries of concern to obtain computers that they have had difficulty constructing on their own, (2) the United States is unable to monitor the end-uses of many of the computers it exports, and (3) the report does not acknowledge the multilateral process used to make prior changes in high performance computer thresholds.