Senior officials of the 12-nation European Community said yesterday that they were disappointed with the reaction on Capitol Hill to their lobbying against provisions they consider protectionist in the Senate trade bill.
They said parts of the bill being considered by the Senate would hurt Western Europe, jeopardize a new round of global trade talks to strengthen the compact that regulates world trade, and subject U.S. exporters to the risk of retaliation.
But the EC officials, at the end of two days of meetings with key lawmakers and administration trade specialists, said Europe is not willing to give up two of the Common Market's practices that the United States considers highly protectionist -- European subsidies to build Airbus passenger planes and subsidies to its farmers.
Frans Andriessen, the EC's vice president for agriculture, dismissed President Reagan's proposal to eliminate all agricultural subsidies in the world within 10 years as unrealistic.
"We don't believe it is possible to expose the community's agricultural industry without any limitations to the erratic fluctuations of the world market," he said. He added that the EC is willing to make "substantial progress in reducing its support system" for farmers, "but it is not a realistic supposition" to think that the EC's Common Agriculture Policy will be phased out by the year 2000.
Andriessen was joined on the Washington visit by Willy De Clercq, the EC's foreign minister.
On Capitol Hill, senators enmeshed in passing trade legislation reacted coolly to the EC lobbying effort.
Finance Committee Chairman Lloyd Bentsen (D-Tex.), for instance, asserted that Andriessen and De Clercq were "egged on by our administration to twist arms in the U.S. Congress on this trade bill" and said that they had their facts wrong on the legislation.
"I know EC countries would strongly resent U.S. interference in their legislative process," Bentsen continued, "and I know they would especially resent it if we got our facts wrong as their representatives here have."
Bentsen was irked by EC attacks on "Gephardt-type language" in the Senate bill, referring to a House provision sponsored by Rep. Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) that would force retaliation against countries that gained "excess" trade surpluses through unfair practices.
The Senate bill, however, contains no such provision, and senators are concerned that the Reagan administration and lobbyists opposed to trade legislation will use the "son of Gephardt" label against any provision attacking trade surpluses or unfair trade practices