Last week a Malaysian Airliner was shot down over eastern Ukraine killing
well over 200 passengers. The question everyone is attempting to answer is who
could have done such a horrible act. Most seem to think ethnic Russian separatists
in eastern Ukraine backed by Russia are responsible. The sad fact however is that
no one at this point really knows. Let’s then look at what’s at stake for some of the
parties concerned.
For the Ukrainian government this is simply more evidence that it does
not have total control over all of its territory. Since Russian speaking separatists
seeking closer ties with Russia took over eastern Ukraine, the national government
in Kiev has for the most part done very little to take back control of this region. It
simply doesn’t have the military might to do so. Not only are the separatists armed
by the Putin regime, Russia would in an event likely intervene militarily should
the Ukrainian army ever prevail over the separatists. In short, eastern Ukraine is
essentially run by what many diplomats and politicians including US Secretary of
State John Kerry are calling thugs. Of course what makes this situation troubling
are that these thugs also possess anti-aircraft missiles capable of shooting planes
down from 33,000 feet in the air, as happened last week with Flight 17. Sadly, as
human corpses remain on Ukrainian soil, Russian backed rebels rather than the
Ukrainian government control events on the ground. Not only have the separatists
taken possession of the black boxes, they also control the corpses much to the
chagrin of the victims’ families. Imagine a situation where a plane is shot over
American or Canadian soil and some rebel separatist group takes charge of the
situation at the same time that it’s accused of having committed such a heinous
crime.
Many blame Russia, and more particularly, Vladimir Putin, for the shooting
down of the Malaysian airliner. Russia after all armed the rebel separatists with a
variety of sophisticated weaponry, including anti-aircraft missiles. But let’s give
Putin the benefit of the doubt and believe that he never intended for the rebels
to shoot down a commercial airliner. Assuming the separatists did shoot down
the airliner for some inexplicable reason, Putin should at least be responsible
for not controlling what can only be called criminal behaviour. These are after
all his thugs. What then is Putin’s next step, other than blaming the Ukrainian
government for having the audacity to try and keep the country’s territorial
integrity intact? Will Putin seek to distance himself from the separatists? Will he
continue to blame the Ukrainian government in Kiev? As it now stands, Putin and
Russia are guilty by association. Many will argue this horrible this event would
never have occurred had eastern Ukraine not become a war zone.
Assuming the Russian separatists are responsible, a major question becomes
why? Were they attempting to blame the Ukrainian government, thus discrediting
Kiev in the eyes of the international community? Is it possible that some rogue
element among the separatists is responsible, or was there some elaborate plan put
together to create an international incident? As it now stands, no one, including the
separatists, is taking responsibility. Public Relations counts for something even in
times of tragedy!
The European Union like the rest of the international community is of course
horrified. The question then becomes how should the EU respond? We still don’t
know who shot the airliner down, but the media, experts, and politicians all seem
to be pointing the finger at both the rebels and their supporters in the Russian
government. Should the EU wait for more proof before imposing real sanctions on
Russia? And what sanctions can the EU impose on Russia given that the former’s
economy is reliant on the latter for its energy supplies? Germany is the engine
that propels the EU’s economy and Germany’s economy runs on Russian gas
and oil. Sanctions would lead to a trade war that the Germans, EU, and Russians
can’t afford. The US meanwhile also has few options it can exercise against the
Russians. This likely explains why President Obama is so cautious in his approach
to the conflict in eastern Ukraine. What for example can the US do to help the
Ukrainian government preserve Ukraine’s territorial integrity? Ukraine is neither in
NATO nor a European Union member state, but it does neighbour Russia. Will US
support for the Ukrainians only make the situation worse and give Putin a reason
for escalating the violence in eastern Ukraine? And assuming America does very
little, does it end up looking weak in the face of Russian aggression?
So far we’ve talked about the political repercussions. But what does
this tragedy say about the future of air travel? The International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO), a UN agency operating out of Montreal, is responsible
along with its 191 signatory states for devising and implementing legally-
binding civil aviation regulations. These regulations include standard practices
for air navigation, infrastructure, flight inspection, and prevention of unlawful
interference. A question that needs to be answered is why a commercial airliner
was permitted to fly over a disputed territory and war zone like eastern Ukraine
where armed rebels are known to possess anti-aircraft missiles. Apparently
Malaysia Airlines was using a route commonly used by other airliners. This begs
the question: Should the general public take for granted that the actors who run
commercial aviation know what they’re doing?
The fact is that ICAO and its members states, along with commercial
airliners, all owe the general public due diligence to make certain that passengers
are transported safely to their points of destination. The airline industry can’t
solve geopolitical problems or civil wars but it can act in a sensible manner so as
to provide its customers with some common sense safety. Making it a rule that a
commercial airliner is not allowed to fly over a war zone where rebels are known
to possess the ability to shoot down commercial aircraft seems like a sensible rule
that ICAO and the commercial airline industry should adopt. Those involved in the
commercial airline industry should be astute enough to re-direct flights to safer air
routes. Since no one in his right mind would encourage anyone to drive through
rebel held areas in eastern Ukraine, the question becomes why would anyone
encourage a commercial airliner to do the same through its air space?
In the end we may never know who shot down the Malaysian airliner. But
ICAO and the commercial airline industry can at least come up with rules to make
commercial aviation safer regardless of whether geopolitical issues and civil wars
are ever resolved.
