This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen
on .
It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
E.U. Urges Sharing Intelligence to Avert Air Disasters
E.U. Urges Sharing Data to Avert Air Disasters
(about 7 hours later)
BRUSSELS — Responding to the downing of a Malaysian passenger jet over eastern Ukraine in July, Europe’s top aviation safety agency urged national governments on Wednesday to share intelligence data with aviation authorities to better enable international regulators and airlines to assess the risks of flying over conflict zones.
BRUSSELS — Responding to the downing of a Malaysian passenger jet over eastern Ukraine in July, Europe’s top aviation safety agency urged national governments on Wednesday to share intelligence data with the aviation authorities to better enable international regulators and airlines to assess the risks of flying over conflict zones.
“We have to find a more fluid system for sharing vital safety information,” Patrick Ky, executive director of the European Aviation Safety Agency, told members of the European Parliament’s transportation committee. “We believe there should be a requirement to establish, in Europe, an alert system that covers all the components of the aviation community, including the appropriate sharing of appropriate information and the involvement of military intelligence.”
“We have to find a more fluid system for sharing vital safety information,” Patrick Ky, executive director of the European Aviation Safety Agency, told members of the European Parliament’s transportation committee. “We believe there should be a requirement to establish, in Europe, an alert system that covers all the components of the aviation community, including the appropriate sharing of appropriate information and the involvement of military intelligence.”
The call for greater coordination comes less than two months after the crash of the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200, , which showed that the standard procedures used by aviation authorities and airline flight planners to protect passenger planes over the war zone in eastern Ukraine were catastrophically inadequate.
The call for greater coordination comes less than two months after the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, which showed that the standard procedures used by the aviation authorities and airline flight planners to protect passenger planes over the war zone in eastern Ukraine were catastrophically inadequate.
Flight 17, flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, was shot down on July 17 over territory controlled by pro-Russian rebels, killing all 298 people on board. The United States and Ukraine have accused the separatists of downing the plane with a powerful surface-to-air missile provided by the Russian military. Moscow has publicly denied those claims, and some Russian officials have gone so far as to suggest that the plane was brought down by the Ukrainian military.
Flight 17, flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, was shot down on July 17 over territory controlled by pro-Russian rebels, killing all 298 people on board. The United States and Ukraine have accused the separatists of downing the plane with a powerful surface-to-air missile provided by the Russian military. Moscow has publicly denied those claims.
A preliminary report by the Dutch Safety Board, which has been charged with investigating the crash, is expected to be published as early as Friday. While continued fighting near the crash zone has severely limited investigators’ access to the wreckage, safety experts said they hoped that data from the plane’s flight recorders, as well as satellite and other imagery, would shed light on the type of missile that struck the jet and the missile’s provenance.
A preliminary report by the Dutch Safety Board, which has been charged with investigating the crash, is expected to be published as early as Friday. While continued clashes near the crash zone have severely limited investigators’ access to the wreckage, safety experts said they hoped that data from the plane’s flight recorders, as well as satellite and other imagery, would shed light on the type of missile that struck the jet and the missile’s provenance.
In an interview after the hearing, Mr. Ky said the goal of the safety agency was to establish a protocol for sharing intelligence gathered by E.U. member states that would enable it to quickly evaluate the credibility of airspace safety assessments provided by countries affected by armed conflict.
In an interview after the hearing, Mr. Ky said the goal of the safety agency was to establish a protocol for sharing intelligence gathered by European Union member states that would enable it to quickly evaluate the credibility of airspace safety assessments provided by countries affected by armed conflict.
The details of those evaluations need not be made public, he said, but the agency would publish a formal bulletin advising airlines and passengers of the security threat level, from low to high. If the agency's advice contradicted a country's official assessment, airlines that still chose to fly routes deemed potentially dangerous would be required to justify their decision to the agency and inform passengers of that choice. (The European Aviation Safety Agency, unlike the Federal Aviation Administration in the United States, does not have the authority to ban airlines from flying certain routes. Individual European governments, however, can issue such bans for carriers under their national jurisdictions.)
The details of those evaluations need not be made public, he said, but the agency would publish a formal bulletin advising airlines and passengers of the security threat level. If the agency’s advice contradicted a country’s official assessment, airlines that still chose to fly routes deemed potentially dangerous would be required to justify their decision to the agency and inform passengers of that choice. (The European Aviation Safety Agency, unlike the Federal Aviation Administration in the United States, does not have the authority to ban airlines from flying certain routes. Individual European governments, however, can issue such bans for carriers under their national jurisdictions.)
Mr. Ky said several E.U. member nations had already expressed a willingness to share limited amounts of civilian and military intelligence for air safety purposes. The agency plans to meet this week with military representatives of the bloc’s nascent diplomatic corps, the External Action Service, with an eye toward drafting a more concrete proposal before the end of the year.
Mr. Ky said several member nations of the union had already expressed willingness to share limited amounts of civilian and military intelligence for air-safety purposes. Flight 17 was shot down while flying at a cruising altitude of around 33,000 feet. Days earlier, the authorities in Ukraine had barred flights below 32,000 feet after a Ukrainian military cargo plane was destroyed by a missile at 21,000 feet. Russia introduced similar restrictions on its side of the border hours before Flight 17 took off from Amsterdam.
The proposal by the European Aviation Safety Agency, which shares responsibility for safe flight operations with the 28 member states of the European Union, was endorsed at the hearing by representatives of the European Commission, the executive arm of the bloc, as well as of Eurocontrol, the Brussels-based agency charged with coordinating air traffic across the region.
Weapons analysts have said the attack on the cargo plane indicated the presence of powerful surface-to-air missiles capable of striking commercial jets flying at standard cruising altitudes.
The plane was downed while flying at a cruising altitude of around 33,000 feet. Days earlier, the authorities in Ukraine had barred flights below 32,000 feet after a Ukrainian military cargo plane was destroyed by a missile at 21,000 feet. Russia introduced similar restrictions on its side of the border hours before Flight 17 took off from Amsterdam.
European legislators at the hearing on Wednesday expressed consternation as to why Ukrainian officials did not close the airspace to civilian air traffic and why international safety regulators appeared not to have questioned Ukraine’s assessment of the threat to passenger traffic.
Weapons analysts have said the successful attack on the cargo plane indicated the presence of powerful surface-to-air missiles capable of striking commercial jets flying at standard cruising altitudes. European legislators at the hearing on Wednesday expressed consternation as to why Ukrainian officials did not close the airspace to civilian air traffic and why international safety regulators appeared not to have questioned Ukraine’s assessment of the threat to passenger traffic.
Despite growing international support for broader sharing of information about the risks to air safety in war zones, some European officials continue to express skepticism that governments would be willing to accept assessments of their airspace safety by third parties.
Matthew Baldwin, director for air transport at the European Commission, told legislators that longstanding international agreements made clear that national governments were primarily responsible for ensuring the safety of their airspace and for informing airlines quickly about unsafe conditions. However, he stressed that the case of Flight 17 made clear that in war zones, “governments may not be able, in practice, to fulfill those obligations.”
In response to pressure from airlines and aviation safety groups, the International Civil Aviation Organization, an arm of the United Nations based in Montreal, formed a task force last month to study the risks to commercial aviation in conflict zones and the possible creation of an independent global body that would collect and distribute risk assessments to airlines. But any such organization would still rely heavily on threat assessments provided by individual governments that may be reluctant to share such sensitive intelligence with third parties.
Salvatore Sciacchitano, executive secretary of the European Civil Aviation Conference, said he welcomed the aviation safety agency’s proposal on sharing intelligence but expressed concern that a European-only system would fail to address the gaps in aviation risk assessment in other parts of the world, notably in the Middle East, where a number of national governments have barred their airlines from flying.
“It is important that an initiative not be taken only at the regional level,” Mr. Sciacchitano said.
Despite growing international support for broader sharing of information about the risks to air safety in war zones, some European officials continue to express skepticism that governments will be willing to accept assessment of their airspace safety by third parties.
“I think there is a real issue with this combination of state sovereignty and international regulation, particularly in a situation when states have vested interests in keeping their airspaces open,” said a senior European aviation safety official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was expressing his private views.
States have economic reasons for wanting to keep airways open, as they can earn tens of millions of dollars a year in overflight fees. Meanwhile, the official said, in times of conflict, governments can be seen to have a political conflict of interest in asserting that they are able to protect their skies from hostile forces, even when events on the ground seem to suggest otherwise.
That said, the official was doubtful that any attempt to establish rules that would subordinate airspace sovereignty to an international body would succeed. As a prime example of how most states are likely to react, he cited the furious Israeli response to the decision by the Federal Aviation Administration in the United States and subsequently by the European authorities to declare the Tel Aviv airport unsafe during the recent fighting in Gaza.
The official noted that the European Union could consider an approach similar to the list of airlines it has banned from its skies of its member nations for safety reasons. While the blacklist is largely symbolic — most of the carriers that make the list had not actually been flying to Europe — it serves as a means of exerting pressure on foreign airlines and governments to uphold international safety standards.
The problem, the official said, is that such outside determinations about airspace are more difficult to make than they are with airlines, whose aircraft, safety records, crews and maintenance regimens can be easily inspected and compared with international norms.
The official noted that determining that national aviation authorities have failed to share a genuine risk to safety before an accident takes place is like proving a negative. “It’s like saying, ‘Hands up, who’s not here?’ ” he said.
