Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Boeing: too big to (be allowed) to fail?

  1. #1
    Contributor Crocodylus's Avatar
    Join Date
    05 Nov 09
    Posts
    308

    Boeing: too big to (be allowed) to fail?

    Here is an article from time.com

    (And just when I thought Airbus had it in the bag )

    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Thursday, Mar. 11, 2010
    Boeing or Bust: Europeans Cry Foul Over a Defense Contract
    By Bruce Crumley / Paris

    The announcement by French aero-defense group EADS that it was pulling out of the bidding process for a $35 billion contract to supply mid-air refueling planes to the Pentagon sent shock waves across Europe this week. EADS, which was partnering in the bid with the U.S. company Northrop Grumman, based its decision on its claim that the competition had been rigged in favor of archrival Boeing — an accusation that spurred charges of unabashed American protectionism in Europe. Now, with both sides digging in their heels, what began as a trans-Atlantic flap over the refueling aircraft business is starting to sound like a full-blown trade war.

    "I think the attitude of the American government on the refueling aircraft issue is a grave infraction of the rules of fair competition between our economies," French Prime Minister François Fillon said Wednesday during a visit to Berlin, where members of the German government echoed his belief that the Pentagon was going to award the contract to Boeing no matter which company had the better bid. "The American government — I'll say here and now — forced EADS to quit the competition." (See pictures of the aircraft NASA, Boeing and the U.S. Air Force are teaming up to develop.)

    French European Affairs Minister Pierre Lellouche, whose strong pro-American positions had long made him something of a rarity in France, was also fuming: "It's absolutely incompatible with the rules and laws. But we're going to react. There will be consequences." And what might those be? Well for one thing, government spokesman Luc Chatel said Wednesday that French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who was also reported to be furious about the turn of events, will raise the issue with President Barack Obama during his visit to the U.S. at the end of March.

    Why the cries of foul from the French? For starters, EADS initially lost the refueling aircraft bid in 2003 — only to see the decision overturned on evidence that Boeing hadn't played fairly in winning it. Then, in 2005, EADS sought to improve its chances of success by allying itself with American partner Northrop Grumman in a new pitch. The pair won the next round of bidding, but that decision sparked a chorus of complaints by U.S. legislators about American contracts (and tax dollars) going to a European business — and it was later overturned in an appeal filed by Boeing. The Pentagon reopened the bidding for a third time earlier this year. But this time, EADS said the terms of the process "clearly favored" Boeing, prompting its decision to bow out on Monday. (See a TIME video on French business.)

    Now, there are fears that Europe could retaliate. The European Commission has warned that it would react sternly to any evidence of American protectionism favoring Boeing in the Pentagon bidding process. And British Business Secretary Peter Mandelson hinted that "the open market to U.S. producers we have in Europe" could be affected if the European Union felt that Americans were refusing to extend similar freedoms to their companies in return. Even some American observers groused that the EADS offer was clearly superior to Boeing's revised bids. U.S. Senator Richard Shelby, a Republican from Alabama, said "the Air Force had a chance to deliver the most capable tanker possible to our war fighters and blew it" by meddling with the process "to produce the best outcome [for Boeing]."

    U.S. defense officials have defended their contract specifications, saying that the bidding process aimed to get the best aircraft at the lowest price. However, Commander Darryn James, a Pentagon spokesman, told Reuters, "We are disappointed that Northrup is not competing." He added that neither the decision by EADS and Northrop Grumman to drop out of the competition, nor the fallout from it, changes "the Defense Department's commitment to trans-Atlantic defense ties." (Read: "For the Arms Industry, India Is a Hot Market.")

    Despite the vehement statements of those denouncing the deal — and the veiled threats of retaliation — most observers say the chances of the spat jumping from the defense sector to wider commercial deals is limited at best. First off, military contracts have historically been so vulnerable to protectionism and national preferences that they aren't covered by World Trade Organization rules. For that reason, says Nicole Bacharan, a specialist on U.S.-European affairs at Stanford University, "the way this contract was handled wasn't any different from how it would be handled in any other country — especially one whose defense industry is as big but fragile as America's."

    Indeed, one French executive of an international group who asked not to be named because he formerly worked as a French diplomat, says the main problem with the refueling plane bidding process was the Pentagon's pretense that the work was up for grabs in the first place. "All nations — France included — make bilateral procurement deals without tendering bids, so what's really annoying about this case is that EADS was led to think it had a chance when the work was going to go to Boeing no matter what happened," the executive says.

    He and Bacharan both believe that the fracas will add to the rising disappointment in Europe with the Obama Administration — but not much more than that. "Everyone would lose if this were to spread to commercial trade, and there also isn't much political gain pushing this much further than it has now," Bacharan says. "The anger is good theater to a domestic audience, but it would travel very poorly across the Atlantic." (Read: "France's Boardrooms: Little Diversity at the Top.")

    All of which means that this U.S.-E.U. catfight over protectionism is probably going to end as abruptly as the EADS-Boeing dogfight that sparked it.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Original Article:
    Boeing or Bust: Europeans Cry Foul Over a Defense Contract - TIME

  2. #2
    Defense Moderator
    Defense Professional
    Lei Feng Protege
    xinhui's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 May 06
    Posts
    7,980
    The whole affairs is lame and it is the tax payer who will pay for the extra Boeing will end up blackmailing.
    “the misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all” -- Joan Robinson

  3. #3
    Ex-Wabber Defense Professional
    Join Date
    10 Dec 04
    Posts
    7,029
    Meh. Same ploy they tried before...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. China Aviation News and Discussion
    By Shuimo in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 04 Apr 10,, 03:45
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 25 Jan 10,, 22:06
  3. US household incomes fail to grow
    By Oscar in forum International Economy
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 24 Sep 08,, 01:54
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08 Mar 08,, 20:57
  5. Zimbabwe: Opposition protests set to fail
    By troung in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 16 Jun 06,, 20:08

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •