The North Atlantic, on which a third of all international air traffic moves, is a shambles, says Mr. Knut Hammarskjold, director general of the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

“There is massive overcapacity, costs have outpaced revenue, yields are too low, malpractice is rampant and traffic has slumped drastically over the past two years”, he told U.S. aviation leaders in a speech to the Wings Club in New York.

More than a year ago the U.S. Government proposed a redefinition of its international aviation policy. But today the talking goes on and decisions are still awaited on what rule changes should be made or whether, in fact, there should be any rules.

Procrastination and policy confusion within the U.S. only means further disruption of the international air transport system—a system that has been close to breaking point for many years, Mr. Hammarskjold said.

He was particularly critical of the fact that international aviation had become, more than ever, a political football in the U.S. The consequences of fumbling could not be ignored, nor should the industry be regarded as a game.

“It is a public service and an important part of the world economy and the economy of each individual country. It is particularly dangerous that the game-playing is happening in this country, which has such a major role in world civil aviation and in the international community”, he went on.

Reason and statesmanship were urgently required to pull the airlines—”especially your own airlines”—back from the brink of financial disaster and to give them a long term stable and non-controversial regulatory environment.

“Unfortunately all too often there is only rhetoric and brinkmanship when there should be enlightened and responsible leadership”.

Urging the Americans to be realistic, Mr. Hammarskjold pointed out that the international community, the world in which the U.S. national airlines had to operate, was quite different from the world at home. It was an interdependent world in which domestic concepts could not be imposed internationally.

On the North Atlantic alone there were more than 22 governments and over twice that number of airlines involved. In such a world of international conventions, bilateral treaties and other mutual obligations, attempts by any country to change the system unilaterally in accordance with its own traditions and philosophies were fraught with danger for the international system. The result of attempting changes in this way was only disagreement and confusion.

“In the process the private enterprise carriers will undoubtedly be the losers”, he warned.

Mr. Hammarskjold conceded that the regulatory framework had to be modernised, but he wanted to see this settled by an international meeting. U.S. Government aviation policy in recent years has been characterised by Orwellian “double-think”, said Mr. Hammarskjold.