The article you linked does not suggest "nearly as bad as the 737-MAX".
After a bit of high-level discussion using that leverage, things may change.
These decisions, in all countries, are being made with consideration for international economic implications. The resulting decisions will be given technical justification as required.
off topic: you sound like a president who thinks that "maximum pressure" is good, but it has not been proven to work.
The issue consists of the anti-stall protection not being aggressive enough under SPECIFIC circumstances:
- Airplane is in Flare mode - Pilot applies sudden and excessive pitch up - Keeps the pitch during pre stall and stall period
Source: https://leehamnews.com/2019/07/19/bjorns-corner-airbus-a321n...
"anti-stall protection not being aggressive enough under SPECIFIC circumstances" means "not enough MCAS in the A321neo"
(there is no leeway for "SPECIFIC circumstances" unless to grant that to the 737-MAX as well)
The FAA could require more MCAS in the A321neo, and of course more testing.
I don't know how much about planes do you know (I'm starting to feel not much since excessive, maintained pitch during flare didn't tell you anything). But the context explained here is rare and obviously more manageable than "one of three redundant sensors failed and an aircraft went out of the sky without giving the crew even a possibility to save their lives".
EDIT: Found new details. The pilot has to keep the excessive pitch although AWARE that he is stalling the aircraft.