Confrontation US airlines and the Middle East has reached a peak. After the Middle Eastern air carriers began to displace Americans routes past demanded that US authorities to review the agreement on “open skies”. Now, the Gulf airlines have put forward their accusations. The conflict reached a new level, but radical changes at the legislative level should not wait, experts believe.
The fight between the major US carriers and the Persian Gulf came to a new stage. In response to the accusations “a great American troika” of unfair competition for Middle Eastern carriers of passengers said that US companies also enjoyed considerable public support – around $ 70 billion. This is stated in a study of the consulting company Risk Advisory Group, which was made by Search Etihad Airways (there are at the disposal of “Gazety.Ru”).
Opposition carriers began early in the year. Three US airlines (so-called big three): American Airlines, United Continental and Delta Air Lines – appealed to the US authorities with a demand to revise the terms of cooperation with the UAE and Qatar within the framework of agreements on the “open skies”, which were concluded in 1999 and 2001 respectively.
The principle of “open skies” implies the possibility to transport passengers between the signatory countries to the Treaty any frequency and at any airport. Since then, the airline Emirates, Etihad, Qatar Airways significantly increase the volume of traffic, particularly in the US.
Over the years 2008-2014 on the routes between US cities and airports of Dubai, Doha and Abu Dhabi has increased about 11 thousand. Seats. According to research by consulting firm Compass Lexecon, the increase was mainly due to the emergence of airline flights in the Middle East, while US companies increased their capacity over the period by only 5%.
Most of the “American troika” has accused competitors that are lured passengers by offering lower prices, and this, in turn, was the result of a huge state support (since 2004 the year received about $ 42.3 billion of state subsidies), tax breaks and incentives for the use of infrastructure.
The US carriers have lost up to 24% of passengers on routes where new competitors. The total passenger traffic between states increased slightly. In this regard, US companies need to cancel or renegotiate an “open skies”. It gives the added benefit of Middle Eastern air carriers already subsidized by their countries, officials say the “troika”.
The confrontation between the two camps escalated in late February, when the head of the US Delta, Richard Anderson on CNN said that US airline industry was hit hard by the September 11 attacks of 2001, which was carried out by terrorists from the Arabian Peninsula. Later, the company apologized for such harsh statements, but the head of Emirates Tim Clark refused to accept them, and the executive director of Qatar Akbar Al Baker accused Anderson of “mismanagement” by the airline.
Meanwhile, Middle Eastern airlines are sure – their American competitors themselves used the mechanisms of state support and received financial assistance, to the report.
Since 2000, the “Great American troika” to maintain at least $ 35.46 billion on the program of debt relief as part of restructuring which was carried out according to the procedure of bankruptcy, the study said. The company also has been allocated additional financial aid amounting to $ 29.4 billion corporation guarantees pension payments to the US government (Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation).
Despite the passions, any radical changes in American aviation legislation should not wait, I’m sure the chief editor of the magazine “Air Transport Observer” Alexei Sinitskii.
According to him, the rejection of the principle of “open skies” on routes between the United States and the countries of the Arabian Peninsula would be an excessive step. For the adoption of the agreement were US airlines themselves, but then they called for free competition, “and suddenly it turns out that they have lost,” said Sinitskii.
«free and open market is good for a strong and secure market and needed protection to those who are weaker to defend against those who are stronger – he says. – This is a contradiction that has always been, and now we are witnessing one of these situations. ” 
No comments:
Post a Comment