Background on the Mexican Side
Last week, a delegation from Mexico’s Secretaría de Infraestructura, Comunicaciones y Transportes (SICT), led by Subsecretary of Transportation Tanya Carro, visited Washington to discuss air services bilateral disputes with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) officials.
Understanding the Dispute
On July 19, the DOT imposed sanctions on Mexico, alleging that it violated the 2015 air services bilateral agreement by prohibiting exclusive cargo companies from continuing operations at Benito Juárez International Airport (AICM) and encouraging them to move to Felipe Ángeles International Airport (AIFA). Additionally, Mexico limited slots at AICM to only 43 operations per hour.
The U.S. claims these actions were discriminatory and unilateral, with no technical justification for the slot limitations. Moreover, they argue that promised ground infrastructure expansions have not materialized over the past three years.
The DOT’s arguments primarily rely on Article 11 of the air services bilateral agreement, which states: “Each Party shall afford airlines of both Parties fair and equitable opportunities… for the performance of international air transportation…” and “neither Party shall unilaterally limit traffic volume, frequency or regularity of service, or the type or types of aircraft operated by airlines of the other Party, except where required by uniform customs, technical, operational or environmental reasons…”
The imposed sanctions by the U.S. include three points: 1) Revoking antitrust immunity granted to Delta and Aeromexico for their joint operations (ATI); 2) Requiring Mexican airlines to submit schedules for all operations in the U.S. to the DOT; and 3) Mandating prior DOT approval for any large-capacity passenger or cargo charter flights to or from the U.S.
These sanctions correlate with Article 11’s commitments, stating: “neither Party shall impose on airlines of the other Party a requirement of preferential rights, a cargo relationship, a rate of non-objection, or any other capacity, frequency, or traffic-related requirement…” and “neither Party shall require airlines of the other Party to submit flight schedules, charter flight programs, or operational plans for approval, except where necessary on a non-discriminatory basis…” Due to Mexico’s failure to comply with the first two points, the U.S. decided to enforce the subsequent two as sanctions.
Outcome of Washington Meeting
The meeting in Washington reportedly proved productive, with sources suggesting that the lost slots for U.S. airlines amount to only seven and could be returned without significant issues. However, resolving the matter concerning exclusive cargo companies presents more complexity but might still lead to an agreement.
The risk lies in the potential for further demands (similar to those in the USMCA) if this issue remains unaddressed. Mexican aviation deserves a long-term plan to foster growth.
Key Questions and Answers
- What is the dispute about? The U.S. claims Mexico violated the 2015 air services bilateral agreement by restricting cargo operations at Benito Juárez International Airport and limiting slots without technical justification.
- What sanctions were imposed by the U.S.? The U.S. revoked antitrust immunity for Delta and Aeromexico’s joint operations, required Mexican airlines to submit schedules for U.S. operations, and mandated prior approval for large-capacity charter flights.
- What were the outcomes of the Washington meeting? The meeting reportedly proved productive, with potential solutions for slot losses and complexities surrounding exclusive cargo companies.
- What are the risks if the issue remains unresolved? There’s a risk of further demands, similar to those in the USMCA, which could negatively impact Mexican aviation.
