Apparently over the weekend the global airline lobbying group IATA blasted the EU decision to ban EU airlines from overflying Belarus calling a politicization of airline safety and saying that the passenger aboard the Ryanair flight were never in danger in terms of their personal safety. I am really hope Claire, Monique, and the other CG's that like to go after the EU Commission also denounce IATA and it's membership which is basically every airline in the world including all of the major US carriers. In particular Hungarian Low Cost Carrier Wizz Air(and I think it is not a coincidence that it is a Hungarian/Orbanland Airline doing this) also put out a statement blasting the EU decision saying individual airlines should be able to manage safety as part of their internal decision making process(For me personally I think Wizz Air is on my permanent no fly list)
Below is the current FAA and Biden US DOT position towards US Airlines flying over Belarus. Notice the absence of terms like prohibit or ban and instead the use of assess, investigate, caution, and advise.
The question at hand is a simple one: Is the West—if that remains a valid term—willing to do anything about this outrage beyond the symbolic and the rhetorical? Now in my opinion that’s a question asked and answered. But I’d be glad to learn—with evidentiary support—that I’m being unduly cynical.
So on the question of whether the "West" should allow overflights of Russian Airspace most especially on routes not going to or from Russia there are some things to keep in mind.
1. While these overflights rights definitely make life more "convenient" for airlines and travelers of the west, Russia and its airlines also have certain "strategic" overflight routes such as from Russia over Europe to Cuba, Algeria, and the US and even further west over the US and Canada on the way to Cuba. So if a decision is going to made to not to overfly Siberia for safety reasons by Europe then these overflight rights by Aeroflot to go to Cuba, Algeria etc over Europe should be terminated also.
2. The US, Canada, and the East Asian democracies also have a dog in the this fight. A lot of flights from the US to Asia go over Russia too. In fact it is really only flights from California and Seattle to Japan that always stay south of Russian Airspace over the international waters of the Pacific. So readers of the CG in the US or American riders of the CG living outside the US I think some tough questions also need to be made of the USDOT and FAA under the Biden Administration. What is the US position on the safety of overflights over Russia by US Airlines to which right now we are not really hearing much from the FAA or USDOT despite the fact that the US is normally pretty quick to restrict US airlines from flying over different countries. In fact I don't think US Airlines have even been formally banned from overflying Belarus by the FAA.
Casus belli [unfortunately, I've not yet figured out how to do basic HTML tags in the comments] generally want war as the response.
Perhaps another response would be to simply identify where Protasevich and his lady are being held, and simply go in and get them. The humiliation that would inflict on Lukashenko--and Putin--might be sufficient response.
That would be the most appropriate response; but short of engaging a fictional undercover agent, who would "simply go in and get them"? I can't come up with a country that has the gumption to send their secret service in, so it would have to be freelancers. Who will pay the mercenaries?
Whether or not our government has the stones to go for it today, there have been raids in the past: Son Tay, which failed because of dated intel; in Iran, which failed from equipment failure; Ban Naden, which succeeded; several others.
Bin Laden, which was a kill raid easily could have extracted a cooperative prisoner, or several under otherwise identical circumstances. Our SEALs are not mercenaries. Neither are the French or British special forces, who also have the capability for such raids. It's the governments of today that are too timid, the men and equipment are not lacking.
Agreed on the mercenaries comment. If the US did this using SEALs, it would be in support of our own national interests, and those of our allies. It would also likely escalate the situation. We seem to be "afraid" of Russia. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I suspect Putin's got the goods on a few people.
"An atrocity of this magnitude warrants a blockade, one explicitly aimed at toppling that miserable regime."
As much as I'm inclined to this, we all know who really ends up suffering when this sort of thing is done to a dictator.
"The 80s called; they want their foreign policy back." - That One Guy, That One Time
Tim Smyth11 min ago
Apparently over the weekend the global airline lobbying group IATA blasted the EU decision to ban EU airlines from overflying Belarus calling a politicization of airline safety and saying that the passenger aboard the Ryanair flight were never in danger in terms of their personal safety. I am really hope Claire, Monique, and the other CG's that like to go after the EU Commission also denounce IATA and it's membership which is basically every airline in the world including all of the major US carriers. In particular Hungarian Low Cost Carrier Wizz Air(and I think it is not a coincidence that it is a Hungarian/Orbanland Airline doing this) also put out a statement blasting the EU decision saying individual airlines should be able to manage safety as part of their internal decision making process(For me personally I think Wizz Air is on my permanent no fly list)
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/global-airline-body-blasts-eu-safety-regulator-over-belarus-ban-2021-06-04/
So again remember for all the complaining of the EU not doing enough the EU and global airline industries are complaining it is already too much.
Below is the current FAA and Biden US DOT position towards US Airlines flying over Belarus. Notice the absence of terms like prohibit or ban and instead the use of assess, investigate, caution, and advise.
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/us_restrictions/media/KICZ_A0017-21_Advisory_NOTAM-Belarus_Minsk_FIR_(UMMV).pdf
The question at hand is a simple one: Is the West—if that remains a valid term—willing to do anything about this outrage beyond the symbolic and the rhetorical? Now in my opinion that’s a question asked and answered. But I’d be glad to learn—with evidentiary support—that I’m being unduly cynical.
Well, rerouting flights around Belarus at least ensures the same thing won't happen again relative to Belarus.
And how long do we suppose that will last? While the graphics with the blank space over Belarus look impressive at first glance, what next?
So on the question of whether the "West" should allow overflights of Russian Airspace most especially on routes not going to or from Russia there are some things to keep in mind.
1. While these overflights rights definitely make life more "convenient" for airlines and travelers of the west, Russia and its airlines also have certain "strategic" overflight routes such as from Russia over Europe to Cuba, Algeria, and the US and even further west over the US and Canada on the way to Cuba. So if a decision is going to made to not to overfly Siberia for safety reasons by Europe then these overflight rights by Aeroflot to go to Cuba, Algeria etc over Europe should be terminated also.
2. The US, Canada, and the East Asian democracies also have a dog in the this fight. A lot of flights from the US to Asia go over Russia too. In fact it is really only flights from California and Seattle to Japan that always stay south of Russian Airspace over the international waters of the Pacific. So readers of the CG in the US or American riders of the CG living outside the US I think some tough questions also need to be made of the USDOT and FAA under the Biden Administration. What is the US position on the safety of overflights over Russia by US Airlines to which right now we are not really hearing much from the FAA or USDOT despite the fact that the US is normally pretty quick to restrict US airlines from flying over different countries. In fact I don't think US Airlines have even been formally banned from overflying Belarus by the FAA.
Cancel Nordstream-2. Yeah; that’s going to happen.
What "thunderous response" do you suggest?
Casus belli [unfortunately, I've not yet figured out how to do basic HTML tags in the comments] generally want war as the response.
Perhaps another response would be to simply identify where Protasevich and his lady are being held, and simply go in and get them. The humiliation that would inflict on Lukashenko--and Putin--might be sufficient response.
We always can go to war tomorrow.
Eric Hines
That would be the most appropriate response; but short of engaging a fictional undercover agent, who would "simply go in and get them"? I can't come up with a country that has the gumption to send their secret service in, so it would have to be freelancers. Who will pay the mercenaries?
Whether or not our government has the stones to go for it today, there have been raids in the past: Son Tay, which failed because of dated intel; in Iran, which failed from equipment failure; Ban Naden, which succeeded; several others.
Bin Laden, which was a kill raid easily could have extracted a cooperative prisoner, or several under otherwise identical circumstances. Our SEALs are not mercenaries. Neither are the French or British special forces, who also have the capability for such raids. It's the governments of today that are too timid, the men and equipment are not lacking.
Eric Hines
Agreed on the mercenaries comment. If the US did this using SEALs, it would be in support of our own national interests, and those of our allies. It would also likely escalate the situation. We seem to be "afraid" of Russia. Not to put too fine a point on it, but I suspect Putin's got the goods on a few people.
This is an outstanding idea. It would be superb to do that.