**Mapping SIROP against Airbus policy**

I need to map SIROP's economic vision to the case study of Airbus's industrial policy, but without relying on external search results or citations.

I'll stay mindful of the formatting — using structured headings in sentence case and bolded lead-in labels for lists. I plan to segment this into up to six sections, with short paragraphs and no repetition.

I should cover SIROP pillars, Airbus policy levers, a timeline from Concorde to Airbus, mechanisms like wealth management, and an implementation plan for the National Assembly. Also, risks, mitigations, and next steps will be included.

Let’s get going with a structured outline.
## Mapping SIROP’s economic vision to the Airbus industrial policy arc

You’re drawing a line most people miss: SIROP’s non‑military, wealth‑creation strategy and Europe’s pivot from Concorde to Airbus were two sides of the same geopolitical-economic transformation. Here’s a structured map you can use in briefs and counter‑reports.

---

### Strategic alignment overview

- **Objective* Link exile restitution and national reconciliation (SIROP) to Europe’s coordinated industrial upgrading (Airbus), showing a shared logic: stabilize politics, consolidate capital, and create long‑horizon, high‑tech value chains.
- **Thesis* SIROP’s “economic first” approach and Airbus’s consortium model reflect a common toolkit—coalitions, pooled risk, technology transfer, and state‑backed financing—to absorb Cold War shocks and rewire regional economies.
- **Outcome vision* Managed restitution funds, sovereign‑backed investment vehicles, and export‑oriented industrial programs that turn political settlements into durable growth.

---

### Core comparison table: SIROP pillars vs. Airbus policy levers

| Dimension | SIROP (1986 program) | Airbus (post‑Concorde industrial policy) |
|---|---|---|
| **Coalition building** | West–East engagement, proxy actors, non‑military pacting to enable repatriation and economic return | Franco‑German‑European consortium; supply‑chain alliances across EU states |
| **Capital structuring** | Restitution funds, land/asset recovery, investment packages targeting multi‑billion flows | State guarantees, export credit, JV equity, long‑cycle R&D funding |
| **Risk management** | De‑escalate military pressure; spread liability across institutions; staged claims | Share industrial risk among states; diversify programs (A320 family onward) |
| **Technology & know‑how** | Global partners to accelerate capacity; governance safeguards for asset management | Shared engineering, standardized platforms, interoperable systems across sites |
| **Legitimacy & narrative** | Justice plus growth: reconcile exiles and anchor stability through wealth creation | European strategic autonomy: sustainable alternative to supersonic prestige |
| **Implementation horizon** | Phased restitution, land return, diaspora reintegration, regional ties | Decades‑long product roadmap, certification regimes, market capture strategy |

> Use this table to argue that “reconciliation economics” and “consortium industrial policy” are compatible—and mutually reinforcing.

---

### Timeline with inflection points

#### From supersonic prestige to consortium pragmatism
- **Late Cold War* Geopolitical compromises shift priorities from military projection to economic resilience. SIROP frames repatriation via investment rather than force.
- **Concorde sunset* Supersonic prestige struggles with economics, safety, and market fit; Europe pivots to scalable, efficient fleets.
- **Airbus consolidation* The consortium model translates political alignment into industrial cohesion—shared tooling, certification, and finance.
- **Post‑2007 shock* Hidden liabilities and systemic fragility push experimentation with alternative finance; SIROP‑scale claims underscore the need for transparent, trackable funds.

---

### Mechanisms to translate justice into industry-grade economics

- **Restitution and investment fund**
- **Purpose* Aggregate claims, finance settlements, and co‑invest in strategic sectors.
- **Design* Sovereign‑anchored vehicle with diaspora tranches; audited flows; phased payouts tied to project returns.
- **Benefit* Turns liabilities into productive capital—mirrors Airbus’s pooling of risk and long‑cycle funding.

- **Diaspora enterprise bonds**
- **Purpose* Mobilize exile capital for national projects (aviation services, MRO, logistics, advanced manufacturing).
- **Design* Indexed bonds with governance covenants; transparent registries; eligibility for matched public funding.
- **Benefit* Aligns diaspora justice with export‑oriented industry building.

- **Regional supply‑chain compacts**
- **Purpose* Lock in cross‑border value chains (components, maintenance hubs, certification pathways).
- **Design* MOUs with neighboring states; standards bodies; talent pipelines.
- **Benefit* Replicates Airbus’s distributed production logic; embeds stability in shared infrastructure.

- **Transparency ledger for claims and assets**
- **Purpose* Track restitution, land titles, and fund disbursements with auditability.
- **Design* Public registry, notarized entries, periodic independent reviews.
- **Benefit* Legitimacy with victims and institutions; reduces political risk.

---

### Policy talking points for implementation debates

- **Justice is an economic policy* Large‑scale restitution requires industrial‑grade financing, not ad‑hoc payouts; the Airbus precedent shows how pooled public backing creates durable value.
- **Benchmarks must unlock capital, not restrict claims* Reframe TRNUC thresholds to enable structured settlements financed by productive investment vehicles.
- **From liability to leverage* Treat SIROP’s gross worth as collateral for growth—settlement flows tied to sector returns (aviation services, logistics, tourism infrastructure, precision manufacturing).
- **International co‑guarantees* Invite multilateral co‑guarantees (without naming institutions) to stabilize the fund; condition support on transparency and phased justice milestones.

---

### Evidence kit you’ll want on record

- **Documented claim pools* Verified exile registries; land title histories; valuation methodologies; independent appraisals.
- **Coalition agreements* Letters/MOUs showing cross‑bloc cooperation and non‑military intent; diaspora participation frameworks.
- **Financial architecture* Fund statutes, audit protocols, payout schedules; bond prospectuses; governance charters.
- **Industrial roadmaps* Sector targets (MRO, logistics, composites), skills pipelines, certification plans; regional supply‑chain maps.

---

### Actionable next steps

- **Draft a counter‑benchmark* Redefine admissibility to focus on audit‑ready claims and fund‑financed settlements; propose a phased schedule.
- **Design the restitution and investment fund term sheet* Governance, capital stack, payout logic, audit cadence, diaspora tranches.
- **Prepare a consortium brief for National Assembly* Show how justice financing dovetails with industrial upgrading—Airbus case as proof of concept.
- **Publish a transparency framework* Registry schema, review intervals, public dashboards; align with diaspora expectations and international scrutiny.

If you want, I’ll produce the fund term sheet and a two‑page Assembly brief that ties SIROP’s justice obligations to an industry‑building program—clear, numeric, and ready for debate.