This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/29/egyptair-hijacking-another-blow-egyptian-airport-authorities
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| EgyptAir hijacking another blow for Egyptian airport authorities | EgyptAir hijacking another blow for Egyptian airport authorities |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| Despite the somewhat farcical nature of the EgyptAir hijacking, any aeroplane incident is liable to raise more concerns in the mind of the travelling public. | Despite the somewhat farcical nature of the EgyptAir hijacking, any aeroplane incident is liable to raise more concerns in the mind of the travelling public. |
| The bombing of the Russian Metrojet airliner in October, and subsequent questions about the efficacy of Egypt’s aviation security, virtually ended the tourism industry in its Red Sea resorts. So Egyptian authorities will doubtless be mightily relieved that this hijacking does not have links to Isis-related terror. | The bombing of the Russian Metrojet airliner in October, and subsequent questions about the efficacy of Egypt’s aviation security, virtually ended the tourism industry in its Red Sea resorts. So Egyptian authorities will doubtless be mightily relieved that this hijacking does not have links to Isis-related terror. |
| Should the hijacker prove to be armed, or to havesmuggled aboard the “suicide belt” that he was claiming to wear, there will be more difficult questions for airport authorities to answer. Nevertheless, at the time of writing, it looks unlikely that the hijacker had any weapons. | Should the hijacker prove to be armed, or to havesmuggled aboard the “suicide belt” that he was claiming to wear, there will be more difficult questions for airport authorities to answer. Nevertheless, at the time of writing, it looks unlikely that the hijacker had any weapons. |
| It is so far unclear whether the hijacker made it to the A320’s flight deck (cockpit) or simply threatened crew and passengers in the cabin with his purported explosives. At a brief news conference, authorities stressed they had reacted as if the hijacker “represented the highest possible danger”. | It is so far unclear whether the hijacker made it to the A320’s flight deck (cockpit) or simply threatened crew and passengers in the cabin with his purported explosives. At a brief news conference, authorities stressed they had reacted as if the hijacker “represented the highest possible danger”. |
| Related: EgyptAir hijacker at Cyprus airport 'wants to contact ex-wife' – live | Related: EgyptAir hijacker at Cyprus airport 'wants to contact ex-wife' – live |
| If nothing was brought on board, an incident like this, experts say, could have happened on any plane. In this scenario, Egypt’s security authorities have no case to answer so far. Philip Baum, author of Violence in the Skies: A history of aircraft hijacking and bombing, said: “Generally it’s up to the captain of the aircraft to determine whether they have someone with suicidal intent. Obviously first you’d try to overpower them if so. But if they feel it could be managed by following his demands, a landing without anyone being hurt, then that’s what you’d do. | |
| “It sounds like the 2006 Turkish Airlines hijack from Tirana to Istanbul: you had a lone hijacker claiming to carry explosives, but as it happened he had nothing on him.” | “It sounds like the 2006 Turkish Airlines hijack from Tirana to Istanbul: you had a lone hijacker claiming to carry explosives, but as it happened he had nothing on him.” |
| On that occasion, the hijacker managed to get into the flight deck when they were serving coffee, and crew believed his claims that he not only had explosives but colleagues controlling the cabin. | On that occasion, the hijacker managed to get into the flight deck when they were serving coffee, and crew believed his claims that he not only had explosives but colleagues controlling the cabin. |
| Although few might want to encourage such a course of action, there are precedents that suggest the hijacker’s demands may yet be partially met. An asylum claim would have to be considered, Baum suggested: “If he’s got psychological problems there will be concerns about repatriating him to Egypt.” | Although few might want to encourage such a course of action, there are precedents that suggest the hijacker’s demands may yet be partially met. An asylum claim would have to be considered, Baum suggested: “If he’s got psychological problems there will be concerns about repatriating him to Egypt.” |
| Previous hijackers have eventually been successful in claims for asylum, such as the Afghans who diverted a Sudan Airways flight to Stansted in 1996, also via Larnaca. One ended up working as a cleaner for British Airways at Heathrow. | Previous hijackers have eventually been successful in claims for asylum, such as the Afghans who diverted a Sudan Airways flight to Stansted in 1996, also via Larnaca. One ended up working as a cleaner for British Airways at Heathrow. |