Uncivil Aviation

Just when we thought it was safe to go back in the skies again… the spectre of hijackings has been reactivated. Not by a terrorist organisation, but allegedly by direction of a rogue dictator who used the ruse of a bomb hoax and the threat of a military fighter jet to force-land a passing commercial aircraft in his territory for the purpose of arresting a political opponent. Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary called it a "state-sponsored hijacking".

How will other nations and the aviation community respond? That response may well determine whether other potentates around the world decide to weaponise their airspace.

The Flight Safety Foundation and other groups have strongly condemned the illegal and unsafe diversion of Flight 4978. "Forcing an aircraft to divert with the purpose of detaining a passenger is a violation of international law and poses a significant safety risk to the passengers and crew of the aircraft", said Foundation President and CEO Dr. Hassan Shahidi. The FSF called for immediate release of the detained passengers who were removed from the aircraft and for a full, impartial and transparent investigation into the circumstances.

This is not the first such event. Five years ago, the Ukrainian government forced a Belarusian airliner to turn back to Kyiv, under threat of fighter intercept, so a journalist could be detained. And less than a decade ago, the US established precedent by coercing France and other western European nations to deny overflight rights to a Bolivian diplomatic aircraft in an attempt to kidnap whistleblower and asylum-seeker Edward Snowden (who, it turned out, was not aboard).

My opinion is that Belarus airspace should be avoided, at a minimum denying them millions in overflight fees. How can an aircrew trust their air traffic controllers? European countries to which Belavia flies, such as Germany, France, Italy and the UK, should cancel such routes (some have already done so). This should apply to other nations which show disrespect for international law and aviation conventions, just as airlines are barred for poor safety records.

The dilemma for pilots and aircrew is how to handle such in-flight situations. (Time to dust off that hijack training manual.)

The International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) and the European Cockpit Association (ECA) stated, "This unprecedented act of unlawful interference will potentially upend all the assumptions about the safest response to bomb threats on flight and interceptions. Without trust and reliable information from States and Air Navigation Service Providers, handling both types of events becomes much riskier to manage.

"The pilot-in-command always has the best overview of the actual situation on board and must be able to react according to the level of risk, regardless of external circumstances. Any measures taken by States to address a specific threat should enhance the crew's ability to assess the situation thoroughly."

They also called upon Ryanair "to provide full support to the pilots and cabin crew on board, both during the future investigation and regarding their physical and mental well-being after such a challenging and stressful event."

With ICAO, IATA, IFALPA, ECA, EASA and others calling for an investigation, by whom? And to what consequences if malice can be proven? One sovereign nation cannot impose a no-fly zone on another sovereign nation, except by force. The power to act is ultimately with individual airlines to protect their crews and passengers by avoiding high-risk regions.

Read more:  EASA Issues Safety Information Bulletin for Belarus Airspace

The world’s governments have shown scant ability to work together to fight an airborne virus, or even to implement common procedures for re-opening border crossings and transnational flights. For more than a year, most of us have been relegated to the no-fly list by virtue of where we reside – guilt by association. Now that many are vaccinated, the governments dither over whether ‘health passports’ are discriminatory. The result is travel planning chaos.

Should we expect the momentarily indignant authorities to translate their consciences into coordinated concrete action to protect the sanctity and safety of the airways? Or will 4978 gradually fade into the background (remember MH17?) … until the next surprise?