Seventeen years later, millions of dollars in legal fees and the bloody and bloody relationship between Boeing and Airbus, the world’s longest-running The end of the trade dispute At last. At least this is how the EU and the United States announced on Tuesday that they would suspend their agreement to impose tariffs on subsidies from the world’s two largest aircraft manufacturers.

But behind the ministerial counterattack and the victory declaration of the transition from “litigation to cooperation”, the fact is that no conclusion has been reached that can end the dispute permanently.

The two sides just decided to shelve the tit-for-tat tariffs and not resolve the root causes of their differences for the time being, and give themselves five years to come up with a framework acceptable to both sides to support the aerospace industries of the two countries.

Don’t doubt that resentment is still brewing. Boeing’s comments about the European Union’s current efforts to resolve the so-called new aircraft launch assistance issue are convincing. The agreement announced to the world on Tuesday made the EU promise not to do such a thing. It only stated that “the two sides will continue to negotiate on the settlement of outstanding support measures.”

For the United States, this means ending the European system of providing loans for new aircraft, and repaying the loans when the aircraft wins a certain level of export orders. As long as loans are issued at market rates, the World Trade Organization considers the system to be legal-but this is not always the case. But it can protect Airbus from the cost of failure. For Europe, the problem is to support Boeing through national tax breaks and defense-funded research that will benefit the commercial aircraft sector.

People close to both sides said that until Friday, a timely agreement at the EU summit of US President Joe Biden seemed unlikely because Boeing continued to insist on Airbus refund support dating back decades.

But at the weekend, the negotiators seemed to have chosen a new approach. They choose to explore ways to improve the dialogue between the two parties in order to reach an agreement in the future. This includes regular contacts between the EU and US trade secretaries in a joint working group, and the transparency of research and development funding.

The hard work begins now. Finding the right framework for both parties is not easy. But everyone realizes that time is running out for their aerospace champions to enjoy decades of commercial duopoly.

Later this year, China’s C919 single-aisle aircraft-competitors of the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320-are expected to enter commercial service. Although its range and fuel efficiency cannot compete with the latest models from Boeing and Airbus, Chinese state-owned airlines have lined up to ensure the success of the aircraft and obtain multiple orders.

Over the years, the relevant state support has been about 49 to 72 billion U.S. dollars, enabling its development to proceed smoothly COMACAccording to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank based in Washington. Although the first variant of C919 may have a limited customer base, future iterations may be more competitive on a global scale—especially if there is support for soft loans to customers.

The European Union and the United States finally realized that if they did not agree on what constitutes a level playing field, it would be difficult for them to complain about China’s support for its space champion. This deal is more about self-protection than about ending trade disputes.

However, to really make a difference, the working group should bring in other aerospace countries, such as the United Kingdom, Brazil, and Canada. If everyone agrees on what constitutes acceptable state support, they may place more emphasis on transparency requirements from China.

All in all, the measures agreed this week may pave the way for a more level playing field. But they also conceal once and for all the notion that civil aviation was once a real business problem.

In a statement on Tuesday, the two sides did not question the legitimacy of the government’s support for the aerospace companies of the two countries. Instead, they focus on how to define what support can be provided and what terms. “This is actually about the acceptable level of subsidies,” said a trade lawyer in Geneva.

Sash Tusa, an aerospace analyst at Agency Partners, said: “This is when people are beginning to realize that civil aviation is… the government and the country.”

Many of us have known this for many years. It’s just a pity that it took 17 years, millions of dollars and a lot of hot air to dispel this illusion.

[email protected]