EurActiv Logo
Actualités & débats européens
- dans votre langue -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Réseau

TOUTES LES RUBRIQUES

Airbus - Boeing : l'UE contre-attaque devant l'OMC

Publié 01 juin 2005 - Mis à jour 29 janvier 2010
Étiquettes
Airbus Boeing
Version imprimableSend by email

La Commission a promptement réagi à la décision des Etats-Unis de réactiver la plainte déposée devant l'OMC au sujet des subventions publiques versées à Airbus. L'exécutif européen a décidé de relancer sa propre plainte visant les Etats-Unis, et se dit prêt à assumer les conséquences du "différend juridique le plus délicat et le plus coûteux dans l'histoire de l'OMC" (selon les termes employés par le Commissaire au commerce Peter Mandelson).

The Commission decided, on 31 May 2005, to countersue the United States at the WTO on the subsidies the US grants to its aircraft manufacturer Boeing. 

"I am disappointed that the US has chosen this confrontation with Europe. America’s decision will, I fear, spark probably the biggest, most difficult and costly legal dispute in the WTO’s history. It will be hard fought on both sides and, I can assure you, Europe’s interests will be fully defended," said the EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson in a press statement. "I regret this diversion of effort but Europe is ready," he added.

Commissioner Mandelson also said that the real reason behind the US decision is not that much the EU subsidies to Airbus, but the fact that "commercially, Airbus is a huge success" and that the Boeing "fears competition".

In a joint statement, the US Trade Representative Rob Portman and Peter Mandelson assured that they are determined not to let this dispute affect transatlantic co-operation on wider bilateral and multilateral trade issues. Both sides are convinced of their case and the illegality of each other's subsidies.

Pascal Lamy, a former EU Trade Commissioner, under whom the dispute over subsidies to Airbus and Boeing started, was recently appointed as head of the WTO. Some lawyers think that the US may argue that under a former European Commissioner the WTO may be biased. 

Réactions : 

The United States trade representative spokesman, Richard Mills, on Europe's decision to countersue (according to The New York Times): "We are not surprised. It has been clear for some time that litigation would mean two cases. We're comfortable having the WTO decide because we think we'll prevail and because that's what the WTO is there for, to help settle trade disputes." 

Airbus "believes that a trade war is against the interest of the industry including its numerous US suppliers. [...] Airbus and its shareholders do believe that a negotiated settlement is not only the best way out, but also quite accessible. They do trust into the pragmatism and the solid business sense so many time demonstrated by the American decision makers." 

Prochaines étapes : 

The dispute may be very long and costly for both the EU and the US.

Contexte : 

The Airbus-Boeing trade dispute between the United States and the EU began with a US complaint (6 October 2004) to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) over subsidies provided to Airbus by four EU member states - France, Germany, Spain and the UK. The then EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy filed a case against the US on the same day, claiming that the US was providing illegal hidden subsidies to Boeing. 

The two sides decided, in January 2005, to try to negotiate an end to subsidies to large civil aircraft manufacturers by 11 April 2005. After months of negotiations, the EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson proposed on 27 May 2005 that both the EU and the US reduce their subsidies to Airbus and Boeing, but the US insists on the EU putting a definitive end to all its subsidies to Airbus. 

The US decided, on 30 May 2005, to request a formal dispute settlement in the WTO.

More in this section

Publicité