Well, the EU "suggests" and every EU country still has the right to make a decision.
I can't see anything wrong here, on the contrary.
Moderator: Latest news team
Of course, not ! Only the frog which wants to be bigger than the ox and which is often quite ridiculous! 27 bouillabaises !
It’s a huge problem and this mentality is Europe’s problem. Because the opposite is also true: if Europe says stop and national politics says ’nah’ you make Europe useless. Imagine France saying ’we don’t care Europe’ to protect the French relationship with the specific country. Which is why American carriers and pilots are still allowed to come to Europe and do many intra-european flights btw. You just have to negociate with the country, not Europe as a unit. Every country only looks at their own profit because at the end of the day, they want to be the biggest in Europe.
Yep. I also wish things could be that simple...Bracebrace wrote: ↑27 May 2021, 13:38
It’s a huge problem and this mentality is Europe’s problem. Because the opposite is also true: if Europe says stop and national politics says ’nah’ you make Europe useless. Imagine France saying ’we don’t care Europe’ to protect the French relationship with the specific country. Which is why American carriers and pilots are still allowed to come to Europe and do many intra-european flights btw. You just have to negociate with the country, not Europe as a unit. Every country only looks at their own profit because at the end of the day, they want to be the biggest in Europe.
How naive are they at IATA? Nothing is going to stop BY from doing this again, apart from not giving the chance.Aviation safety must never be politicized.
The Ryanair flight has been hijacked and as such IATA is plain wrong when they call “banning European aircraft from using Belarusian airspace with a Safety Directive” a politicisation of aviation safety. Taking measures to avoid possible hijacking is basic aviation security and has nothing to do with politics. By stating that “EASA should rescind its prohibition” they are in fact minimising the hijack and taking a political position themselves.ezis_bis wrote: ↑06 Jun 2021, 11:35
How naive are they at IATA? Nothing is going to stop BY from doing this again, apart from not giving the chance.
The number of BY citizens who moved to the 3 Baltics has increased significantly, even during the pandemic. I would be very worried if I am an (ex-)BY citizen living in EE/LV/LT, and needing to take a flight overflying BY.
IATA does not minimise the hijack. See their press release from 24th May: “...IATA strongly condemns any interference or requirement for landing of civil aviation operations that is inconsistent with the rules of international law. We call for an independent investigation by competent international authorities. We support the decision of the ICAO Council to launch such an investigation under the provisions of Article 55 (e) of the Chicago Convention..."Poiu wrote: ↑06 Jun 2021, 12:31The Ryanair flight has been hijacked and as such IATA is plain wrong when they call “banning European aircraft from using Belarusian airspace with a Safety Directive” a politicisation of aviation safety. Taking measures to avoid possible hijacking is basic aviation security and has nothing to do with politics. By stating that “EASA should rescind its prohibition” they are in fact minimising the hijack and taking a political position themselves. On the other hand banning Belavia from European airspace is political indeed, as there is no danger whatsoever for a hijack by a European country.ezis_bis wrote: ↑06 Jun 2021, 11:35 How naive are they at IATA? Nothing is going to stop BY from doing this again, apart from not giving the chance.
The number of BY citizens who moved to the 3 Baltics has increased significantly, even during the pandemic. I would be very worried if I am an (ex-)BY citizen living in EE/LV/LT, and needing to take a flight overflying BY.
Then what is IATAs solution?Passenger wrote: ↑06 Jun 2021, 14:07 IATA does not minimise the hijack. See their press release from 24th May: “...IATA strongly condemns any interference or requirement for landing of civil aviation operations that is inconsistent with the rules of international law. We call for an independent investigation by competent international authorities. We support the decision of the ICAO Council to launch such an investigation under the provisions of Article 55 (e) of the Chicago Convention..."
If IATA really condemns the hijack, why don’t they welcome/support/understand the preventive security measures taken by EASA awaiting the results of such an investigation?Passenger wrote: ↑06 Jun 2021, 14:07]
IATA does not minimise the hijack. See their press release from 24th May: “...IATA strongly condemns any interference or requirement for landing of civil aviation operations that is inconsistent with the rules of international law. We call for an independent investigation by competent international authorities. We support the decision of the ICAO Council to launch such an investigation under the provisions of Article 55 (e) of the Chicago Convention..."
Montréal, 27 May 2021 – The ICAO Council expressed its strong concern today at the apparent forced diversion of Ryanair Flight FR4978, a commercial passenger aircraft flying in Belarus airspace on Sunday, 23 May 2021. At a special meeting convened, the ICAO Governing Body underlined the importance of establishing the facts of what happened, and of understanding whether there had been any breach by any ICAO Member State of international aviation law, including the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention) and its Annexes.
Recalling Article 55 (e) of the Chicago Convention, the Council decided to undertake a fact-finding investigation of this event, and in this connection requested the ICAO Secretariat to prepare an interim report to the Council for a subsequent meeting of the current session, presenting the available facts and relevant legal instruments.
The Council also called upon all ICAO Member States and other relevant stakeholders to collaborate with this fact-finding investigation in the interests of ensuring the safety and security of civil aviation, and offered the assistance and expertise of ICAO in the pursuit of this endeavor. "The Council has therefore decided that all relevant facts should be officially established through an ICAO investigation conducted by the ICAO Secretariat," emphasized ICAO Council President Salvatore Sciacchitano.
ICAO Secretary General Dr. Fang Liu responded to the Council's decision during the meeting and assured the full support and cooperation of the Secretariat in implementing this decision.
https://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/ICA ... ident.aspx
Exactly! And so they shouldn’t call a preventive security measure a “politicization of aviation”.
I wasn't aware that this was a political forum. I thought it was about aviation, leaving politics aside.Bracebrace wrote: ↑27 May 2021, 13:38It’s a huge problem and this mentality is Europe’s problem. Because the opposite is also true: if Europe says stop and national politics says ’nah’ you make Europe useless. Imagine France saying ’we don’t care Europe’ to protect the French relationship with the specific country. Which is why American carriers and pilots are still allowed to come to Europe and do many intra-european flights btw. You just have to negociate with the country, not Europe as a unit. Every country only looks at their own profit because at the end of the day, they want to be the biggest in Europe.