GE-Avic Deal Highlights Old Suspicions Gregory Polek

2011-01-29 (China Military News cited from ainonline.com) — GE Aviation’s collaboration with China’s Avic would initially support the electronics on the Comac C919, but the U.S. company stresses the deal’s wider implications for future programs, not just in China.

Protectionists have sounded the familiar alarms over GE’s joint venture with China’s Avic, formalized during January’s state visit to Washington by Chinese president Hu Jintao. The venture, an equal partnership between GE Aviation and Avic, will involve the development and marketing of integrated, open-architecture aviation electronic systems to the global commercial aerospace industry for new aircraft programs, according to GE.

On the other hand, critics such as the Washington Post’s Steven Pearlstein accuse GE of selling some of the “crown jewels” of U.S. technology for access to China’s “rigged” market, jeopardizing America’s competitive advantage in aerospace technology. Others, such as the right-wing blog Family Security Matters, insist the U.S. cannot trust the Chinese to honor agreements meant to prevent transfer of the technology for military purposes, and they’ve found a perfect symbol in the ominous images of the new Chinese J-20 stealth fighter to support their case.

GE and Avic plan to collaborate on the central information system and backbone of the Comac C919′s networks and electronics, meant to host the airplane’s avionics, maintenance and utility functions. Under the plan, GE and Avic would continue to support their legacy programs and honor existing contracts with customers.

Of course, the agreement remains subject to government approvals the likes of Pearlstein have called on President Barack Obama to block. Rather, they say, the U.S. should emulate the Chinese by offering subsidies and directed credit for local companies, adopting “buy-American” provisions for government agencies and government contractors, manipulating currency and adopting rules on “conditional market access” and “indigenous innovation.” Ironically, the same conservative critics remain steadfastly opposed to what they regard as illegal subsidies at European airframer Airbus.

2 comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Scroll To Top