&w=3840&q=100)
China weighs ordering up to 500 Airbus jets during EU leaders' visit
By Siddharth Philip and Danny Lee
China is considering placing an order for hundreds of Airbus SE aircraft as soon as next month, when European leaders visit Beijing to celebrate the countries' long-term ties, according to people familiar with the matter.
Deliberations are underway with Chinese airlines about the size of a potential order, said the people, who asked not to be named discussing confidential matters. A deal could involve about 300 planes and include both narrowbody and widebody models, they said, with one person saying the order could range between 200 and as many as 500 aircraft.
Negotiations are fluid and could fall apart or take longer to reach a conclusion, the people said.
The European planemaker rose as much as 2.3 per cent in early Paris trading. Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc, which makes engines for Airbus's widebody aircraft, rose as much as 0.7 per cent in London.
French President Emmanuel Macron and Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany are among leaders that may visit Beijing in July to mark 50 years of diplomatic relations between China and the European Union. Their countries are the two biggest owners of Airbus, and a high-profile deal with the planemaker would allow Chinese President Xi Jinping to send a message to US President Donald Trump over trade.
China and the US — the world's two biggest economies — are at loggerheads over trade rules that Trump is determined to reset during his second presidential term. Should the two sides resolve their differences, Airbus rival Boeing Co. could potentially win big — the US planemaker is America's biggest exporter and a jet sale was featured in a US-UK trade deal in May.
To date, however, Boeing has been penalized in China. In April, authorities in Beijing told airlines to stop taking deliveries of Boeing jets. Trade tensions and the crises that befell the 737 Max jet date back years, and have given Airbus an upper hand in what was once a carefully balanced market between the two dominant planemakers.
Widebodies would be a significant portion of a new Airbus order, the people said, with one person saying the A330neo, the planemaker's smallest twin-aisle model, could win some sales. The number of twin-aisle jets in backlog for China's state-run and privately operated carriers has dwindled, as Boeing has traditionally sold more in the market.
Should the order run to 500 planes it would rank as one of the biggest ever and certainly the largest for China, eclipsing an order for about 300 single-aisle Airbus jets made in 2022 that was then worth around $37 billion. Air India Ltd. inked an order for 470 Airbus and Boeing planes back in 2023 and another Indian airline, IndiGo, placed a record-breaking order with Airbus in mid 2023 for 500 narrowbody aircraft.
Boeing hasn't won a major order from China since at least 2017 due to trade tensions and self-inflicted issues. In 2019, China became the first nation to ground the 737 Max following two deadly crashes. Trade disputes with the Biden and first Trump administrations also helped tilt Chinese orders toward Airbus. Then in 2024, Boeing suffered a quality crisis when a door plug blew out mid-flight in January.
Any deal would likely be carried out through China's state-run aircraft procurement body, which typically negotiates on behalf of the country's airlines.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fibre2Fashion
17 minutes ago
- Fibre2Fashion
US, Chinese prezs speak on phone; focus 'almost entirely' on trade
US President Donald Trump held a long and 'very good' phone call yesterday with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, according to a Truth Social post by the former. 'I just concluded a very good phone call with President Xi, of China, discussing some of the intricacies of our recently made, and agreed to, Trade Deal,' Trump wrote. President Trump held a long and 'very good' phone call yesterday with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, the former announced on Truth Social. The 90-minute call “resulted in a very positive conclusion for both Countries,†he noted. The conversation focused “almost entirely on TRADEâ€. Teams from both sides would meet soon, at a yet-to-be-determined location, to work out further trade arrangements. 'The call lasted approximately one and a half hours, and resulted in a very positive conclusion for both Countries,' he noted. A Chinese state-run news agency confirmed that the conversation was initiated by Trump. Trump's social media post said the conversation focused 'almost entirely on TRADE' and clarified that issues such as Russia/Ukraine or Iran were not discussed. Both the countries had struck a 90-day agreement on May 12 to roll back certain tariffs imposed during the ongoing trade war. However, tension over critical minerals continued. Teams from both countries would meet soon, at a yet-to-be-determined location, to work out further trade arrangements, Trump's social media post announced. The US side will be represented by treasury secretary Scott Bessent, commerce secretary Howard Lutnick and US trade representative Jamieson Greer. 'President Xi graciously invited the First Lady and me to visit China, and I reciprocated,' Trump added. Fibre2Fashion News Desk (DS)
Mint
26 minutes ago
- Mint
Tesla's China skid: Blame market forces, not politics
The biggest story swirling around Tesla Inc. right now concerns CEO Elon Musk's sudden, if unsurprising, break with a leader who is as calm and unassuming as he is, US President Donald Trump. But the important story concerns what is happening far from these shores: China. Shipments from Tesla's Shanghai factory fell by 15% in May compared with a year before, according to preliminary data from China's Passenger Car Association. That marks eight straight months of declining output from Tesla's single biggest electric vehicle factory, accounting for around 40% of its global capacity. These figures don't reveal which of those EVs get sold in China or get exported from there, but this trend is not Tesla's friend. Through April, Tesla's share of China's battery EV market had fallen by more than half over the past four years, according to data compiled by New AutoMotive, a UK-based research firm. Also Read: Electric debacle: Tesla's troubles started before Musk wore the MAGA cap The numbers also suggest deteriorating economics. On a simple, calendar-day basis, they imply Shanghai factory utilization of 76% in May. That isn't terrible, but it's down significantly from last May. So far this year, excluding the month of February when Tesla was retooling for the refreshed Model Y, implied utilization is running 10 points lower than the same period in 2024. Speaking of that updated Model Y, it isn't a good sign that Tesla has already offered incentives like zero-percent financing in China. Taken together, lower capacity utilization, implying higher fixed costs per vehicle and higher discounts, meaning less net revenue, point to a continuing problem with what was all too apparent in Tesla's first quarter results: Crushed profit margins in its main business. Unlike Tesla's weaker EV sales in other important markets such as California and Europe, the slide in China has nothing to do with Musk's politics. Tesla's reputation within China remains high, viewed as an essential catalyst in revolutionizing the quality and scale of the country's auto sector. Except that 'catalyst' isn't quite the right word, because the beauty of catalysts is that they spark transformations but don't get used up in the process. In this case, it would be more accurate to call Tesla a reactant, because the domestic Chinese EV industry spurred on by its example is now eating it alive. Also Read: Mint Quick Edit | BYD versus Tesla: Let merit decide pole position While Tesla's share of China's battery EV sales is down to about 10% so far this year, that drops to 5.8% when you include other so-called 'new energy vehicles' (NEVs) such as plug-in hybrids, according to figures compiled by Goldman Sachs. Competitors including BYD, which holds about 27% of China's NEV market, are now delivering the sort of excitement that Tesla used to in terms of looks, range and driver assistance features—and at lower prices. Xiaomi, the smartphone maker, is in the process of launching the YU7, a high-tech, fast-charging electric SUV that resembles a Porsche or Ferrari but is perhaps best pictured as a Model Y-seeking missile. In an alternate dimension, China would serve as a hothouse laboratory for Tesla to hone world beating, profitable EVs that might even be exported to its home market. In the dimension we've got, Musk has seemingly lost his ambition to develop brand new, affordable EVs that can compete across the world. Tesla's last genuinely new model, the Cybertruck, is certainly big but only about as 'beautiful" as the Trump tax bill that Musk now openly derides as an 'abomination." While Tesla sits apart from the legacy automakers in the US, Germany and Japan in many respects— certainly in terms of valuation—it has, like them, seen its position in China weaken rapidly. And regardless of Musk's latest posts on X, he worked hard to secure the election of a president and Congressional majority intent on crushing EV sales in the US. With the end of the second quarter approaching, and the sales figures emanating from China and Europe portending another set of weak earnings, it is perhaps little wonder that this narrative is crowded out by all manner of other things. Musk, who ditched Tesla's public relations team and routinely denounces the media as 'propaganda" has nonetheless plunged into a media blitz of late, and has now whipped up a new political intrigue. Also Read: Tesla's slump: When social intelligence clashes with artificial intelligence Is the break with Trump real? My litmus test: watch out if @elonmusk posts a picture of a taco. [His other jabs at Trump on X seem convincing enough]. Plus, of course, we have the imminent launch of Tesla's self-driving cars in Austin, Texas. Whatever they actually turn out to be, with the always dubious narrative of Musk's White House job boosting Tesla's fortunes now played out, those robotaxis constitute the main pillar supporting Tesla's triple-digit earnings multiple. Certainly, that number has nothing to do with what's happening in the biggest EV market on the planet. ©Bloomberg The author is a Bloomberg Opinion writer.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Reviving the Russia-India-China grouping: Why it may not serve India's interests
The state of India's relationship with China is not yet such that it should let itself be drawn into a closer embrace of its northern neighbour read more Speaking at a conference on security and cooperation in Eurasia in the city of Perm in the Ural mountains on May 29, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov reaffirmed Russia's interest in reviving the Russia-India-China Troika (RIC). Lavrov said: 'I would like to confirm our genuine interest in the earliest resumption of the work within the format of the troika – Russia, India, China – which was established many years ago on the initiative of (ex-Russian prime minister) Yevgeny Primakov and which has organised meetings more than 20 times at the ministerial level since then, not only at the level of foreign policy chiefs but also the heads of other economic, trade and financial agencies of the three countries.' He also said, 'Now that, as I understand, an understanding has been reached between India and China on how to calm the situation on the border, it seems to me that the time has come to revive this RIC troika.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While Lavrov has called for the revival of RIC, this may be easier said than done. Given the ongoing disputes and geopolitical dynamics, India may be unwilling to fully embrace such a close trilateral alliance with China. Contrary to what Lavrov said, border tensions between India and China continue to persist. While diplomatic efforts and troop disengagements have occurred, a full resolution remains elusive, and the potential for further clashes persists. The situation at the India-China border continues to be tense despite recent disengagement agreements. Increased infrastructure development and troop deployments along the border by China in recent years have exacerbated tensions. As General Upendra Dwivedi, the Indian Army Chief, said earlier this year, India will not reduce the number of its troops deployed along the Line of Actual Control with China anytime soon, asserting there is still 'a degree of standoff' persisting between the rival armies and the two countries need to rebuild trust to de-escalate overall tensions. Gen Dwivedi's statement makes it quite clear that there is a lack of trust for China. The 2020 Galwan Valley clashes and ongoing border disputes have continued to strain the relationship between India and China. This lack of trust will hinder the prospects of reviving the RIC. The India-China territorial dispute stems from differing interpretations of the border, with China disputing India's claims over regions like Aksai Chin and Arunachal Pradesh. China has issued maps showing Aksai Chin — an area of India's state of Kashmir mostly controlled by China since the 1962 war— and the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh within Chinese territory. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD As recently as May 14 this year — less than three weeks ago — China has reasserted its territorial claims in Arunachal Pradesh. Despite professed claims about efforts to improve diplomatic ties with India, the Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs published its latest names for places in Arunachal Pradesh, which China calls Zangnan and says is part of the Tibetan autonomous region. The renaming of 27 places covered an array of geographical features: 15 mountains, five residential areas, four mountain passes, two rivers and one lake. India rejected the new Chinese names for places in Arunachal Pradesh as a 'preposterous' attempt to alter the 'undeniable' reality that the state 'was, is, and will' always be an integral part of India. It is, in fact, an old Chinese habit to periodically issue lists of new names for locations in Arunachal Pradesh. India describes the names as 'inventions' by China and has consistently and unequivocally dismissed them. China's renaming of places in Arunachal Pradesh is a strategic move to assert unilateral claims, which India firmly rejects, emphasising Arunachal's integral status. Strengthening infrastructure, military deterrence, and global alliances is crucial for India to counter China's tactics and safeguard sovereignty. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD There are important geopolitical considerations which also need to be taken into account. India feels that the China-Pakistan axis, characterised by strong military and economic ties, poses a strategic challenge for India. This axis is working against Indian interests, particularly due to China's support for Pakistan in regional disputes. China is a major supplier of military equipment and technology to Pakistan, further strengthening their relationship but escalating mistrust with India. China has emerged as Pakistan's largest arms supplier, accounting for almost 81 per cent of Islamabad's weapon systems inventory. Among the weapons supplied by China to Pakistan are fighter jets, missiles, drones, radar systems, warships and submarines. Following the Pahalgam terror attack, China moved swiftly to arm Pakistan. Reports suggest Beijing delivered advanced PL-15 air-to-air missiles to Pakistan's air force within days. Debris from one such missile, found undetonated in India's Punjab, points to Chinese involvement in Pakistan's latest assault. Pakistani jets used in combat were also Chinese-made. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD China's support for Pakistan, particularly in the context of terrorist groups, further fuels India's concerns. China reportedly blocked India's proposal at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to ban five Pakistan-based terrorists who carried out terrorist acts against India. These five terrorists are Abdul Rauf Asghar, Sajid Mir, Abdur Rehman Makki, Talha Saeed, and Shahid Mehmood Rehmatullah, who have been involved in several terror attacks in India, including the 26/11 attacks, the 2019 Pulwama attacks, the 2016 Pathankot attack, the 2001 Parliament attack, and the IC 814 hijack. India wanted to get them designated by the UNSC as global terrorists, but China blocked this effort. India's request to put sanctions on the proxy of Lashkar-e-Taiba – The Resistance Front (TRF) – the terrorist outfit which was involved in the Pahalgam terror attack last month – was also blocked by China at the UN Security Council. Lavrov also said that India is being forced by the US and Quad into military operations, even though it was formed for trade purposes. He said that India must have realised the militarisation agenda of the trade alliance and that Quad is organising naval and military exercises which target China in the garb of economic and trade cooperation. Showing his distrust of the West, Lavrov said: 'Take note of the current developments in the Asia-Pacific region, which the West has started calling the Indo-Pacific region to give its policy a clear anti-China orientation — expecting thereby to additionally make our great friends and neighbours India and China clash.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Clearly, Russia has misgivings regarding Quad, although it is a diplomatic partnership, not a military alliance. The fact is that India is not aligning with the West. Rather, it follows a policy of multi-alignment. India has carefully crafted its Indo-Pacific policy and participation in Quad so as to strengthen maritime security and maintain a free and open Indo-Pacific region. On the other hand, it has also joined efforts to strengthen the multilateral forum BRICS. India is importing essential defence equipment as well as maintaining its close ties to Russia even while it has entered into a strategic partnership with the US to balance China. No doubt, India's relationship with the United States has deepened in recent years, driven by shared concerns over China's growing assertiveness in the region. However, India has been careful to avoid becoming a US ally; New Delhi has maintained an independent foreign policy and has refused to participate in any military alliance directed against China. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's membership of Quad does not pose any threat to Russia. India has developed an independent foreign policy, carefully balancing relations with Western nations and Russia while simultaneously expanding its regional influence in the Indo-Pacific. India's foreign policy is based on strategic autonomy. India's stance on the Russia-Ukraine war substantiates this. India has not sided with the West and has chosen a course of neutrality in the war in Ukraine. It has neither condemned nor blamed Russia for the war. India abstained on all UN resolutions pertaining to Ukraine which demanded a Russian withdrawal or condemned Russia for the war with Ukraine. The fact that Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited the US in September last year to meet the former US President Joe Biden, and next month he went to Russia to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin, emphasises India's strategic autonomy. In conclusion, it needs to be said that Lavrov's call to revive the RIC is to reassert Russia's importance as a power centre on the global platform. India is already walking the diplomatic tightrope by being a member of Quad on one hand and of BRICS on the other. The state of the India-China relationship is not yet such that we should let ourselves be drawn into a closer embrace of our northern neighbour, whose policies are harmful to us beyond doubt. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Perhaps we could privately share our views with the Russian leadership, explaining our concerns and telling them that for the moment, we see BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) as providing enough scope for trilateral cooperation between Russia, India and China. The writer is a retired Indian diplomat and had previously served as Consul General in New York. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
