MH17 crash: Western governments knew risks of Ukraine overflights: report

[Little Tich]

Source: The Sydney Morning Herald

Western governments knew the dangers of flying over eastern Ukraine before Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 crashed but did nothing about it, German investigative journalists say.

Correctiv, which describes itself as the first non-profit German-language investigative newsroom, has won a partial court victory in its quest to find out what governments knew before the tragedy.

The Administrative Court in Berlin this week partly upheld Correctiv's right to know and ordered the German foreign office to disclose facts the office had withheld.

Writing on Correctiv's website, David Schraven said its investigation showed the office had detailed information of the dangers of flying over eastern Ukraine several days before MH17 took off.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh17-crash-western-governments-knew-risks-of-ukraine-overflights-report-20150822-gj59x6.html

---

Note: This is somewhat speculative, but I'm posting it anyway.

[MADem]

1. What should they have done? Nuked Russia? Spoken sternly to them?

Malaysia is not a "western government."

I don't think this is even LBN. It's an element of a continuing story, at best....

[CreekDog]

2. you make the solution sound so impossible, when it isn't

fly around the area with hostilities.

most of the airlines were doing this then, after that, pretty much all of them were.

[MADem]

3. Malaysia wasn't without access to world news. They knew the score.

Perhaps foolishly, they crossed their fingers, took a chance, and hoped the Russians would be able to tell the difference between them and a military a/c. The Russians weren't able to do that, and all those people were murdered. It's all very sad. I'm sure if Malaysia had it to do over again, they would have raised the price of a ticket a few Malaysian Ringgits and 'gone around' instead of flying over.

[bemildred]

4. Not fly commercial planes over a war zone is what you do. nt

[MADem]

5. I am not sure why or how this is "Western governments'" fault--which is where the OP led.

Malaysia made the decision to save a few bucks and flew into harm's way instead of going around.

It resulted in a dreadful tragedy.

[bemildred]

6. The implication is that "western governments" knew the risks and flew there anyway,

for political reasons one presumes, or because of political pressures, or because they were stupid or didn't care. At the time it was a big deal to claim Ukraine was not at war so as to get the IMF funding. Later it was noticed that IMF funding was available in this case for countries at war, so now we can admit Ukraine is at war and not fly planes there any more. I didn't think that was unclear. The entire Ukraine issue is just awash in political maneuvering of the most obfuscated and arcane sort, and many people have been killed in the crossfire already.

[MADem]

7. Malaysia isn't a western government, though. All the other governments

flew AROUND the trouble and spent money/time on fuel and re-routing to avoid the area.

But the doomed flight was one of hundreds that crossed the crisis zone that week, with Russian Aeroflot, Singapore Airlines and Ukrainian International Airlines having the most flights. Some airlines, including Qantas, British Airways, Air France and Polish airline LOT, had avoided it for some time. Changing course would result in longer flying times and increase airlines' fuel costs.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/mh17-crash-western-governments-knew-risks-of-ukraine-overflights-report-20150822-gj59x6.html#ixzz3jXe5pmX6

[bemildred]

8. Right, it was about the money until somebody got shot down.

Then they all had to deal with it.

The issue of whom is or is not a western government at any particular time is of course negotiable. That is sort of what the whole Ukraine crisis is about, eh? I mean what is Japan? Is Japan a western government? Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

[MADem]

9. I am not sure what they're saying here.

I find it unlikely that Malaysia didn't know that other nations were avoiding the area. I'm not sure if they thought they'd be safe because they weren't a NATO nation, or something...? Of course, a lot of Dutch were on that plane, and they are NATO....it's just an odd article.

[bemildred]

10. i am.

You want to argue about nomenclature, I'm not interested in that, I already addressed that, and I don't think it matters anyway how we classify Malaysia here.

The article, of course, is part of the polemic discourse that pollutes discussion of this issue.

[GoneFishin]

11. Hinky "attacks" have been used throughout history to whip up public support for war. I think

this is very deservedly in the "yet unknown" category.

On the whole, I feel like we are being spoon fed a bullshit story complete with cherry picked details about the "investigation".

[bemildred]

12. I have always been of the opinion it was likely an accidental shootdown,

probably by the rebels in the east, who were shooting military planes down at the time, and proud of it.

What I object to is that tragedy being used to thwart a political solution to the crisis in government that Ukraine has had ongoing now since the collapse of the USSR.

Media coverage by both sides of the shootdown has been atrocious, mainly whoring after whatever their relevant governments wanted, butt-covering all the way.

[GoneFishin]

13. Probably. But I am open to the possibility of something more sinister. People who make trillions

making products whose sole purpose is to kill people already have a place reserved for them in hell. And I won't put anything past them.

More importantly though, is the resistance by all involved to freely provide satellite, radar, and air traffic control data, as well as a lack of a thorough investigation into the decision to route the flight into a war zone.

[bemildred]

15. Eh maybe.

I am as cynical as can be about people and what they will do, but I think it is a mistake to spend much time speculating about how they rationalize their actions. If the actions they do are clearly wrong, as for example shooting down a plane with people in it is wrong, there is no need to worry about how it was rationalized.

For legal process you have to get into that, who did what and why they thought they were doing it, but for politics, for policy, you don't need to be that picky. Mistakes were made.

The lack of transparency from the surveilance aficianadoes has been telling, yes. The entire story has reeked from the beginning, from before the beginning.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. That's not 'all the other', and it's not 'governments' either, is it?

Your quote proves you completely wrong. Every single bit of it.

"But the doomed flight was one of hundreds that crossed the crisis zone that week, with Russian Aeroflot, Singapore Airlines and Ukrainian International Airlines having the most flights. Some airlines, including Qantas, British Airways, Air France and Polish airline LOT, had avoided it for some time. Changing course would result in longer flying times and increase airlines' fuel costs."

So it was just some, it was airlines who made their decision, and they did that some time before the development of a transport plane being shot down at 6200 metres. The specific reason for avoiding it was the dispute over who controlled Crimean airspace:

Ukrainian air traffic control issued several Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs) on the situation in
eastern Ukraine. The last NOTAM issued prior to the downing of flight MH17 closed part of
eastern Ukrainian airspace below 9.7 km (flight level 320). Current NOTAMs are publicly
available on the website of EUROCONTROL. Besides these NOTAMs, Ukraine provided no
information prior to 17 July relating to the safety of the airspace over eastern Ukraine. There
were no specific consultations on the safety of the airspace over eastern Ukraine.
The airspace over Crimea is claimed by both Ukraine and Russia. With both countries
asserting their right to provide air traffic control services, the situation there became unsafe,
and some airlines (including Dutch airlines) have been avoiding the airspace over Crimea
since the start of the conflict in Crimea in early April.
...
During the briefing the Ukrainian Minister of Foreign Affairs outlined the general security
situation, particularly the increasing escalation of the conflict in eastern Ukraine and Russia’s
role in this. The briefing took place the day before the special session of the European
Council on 16 July. During the briefing the spokespersons for the Ukrainian government
urged the international community above all to adopt a strong stance on Russian interference
in the conflict. This was the central theme of the briefing.

The downing earlier that day of an Antonov flying at an altitude of 6,200 metres was cited as
an example of the general security situation. The hosts mentioned in this connection the
possible presence of anti-aircraft weapons, which, according to them, the separatists did not
have. It was not known what weapon system had been used.

On the same day (14 July) the Ukrainian authorities issued a NOTAM setting the minimum
flight altitude for Ukrainian airspace at 9.7 km (flight level 320). No statements were made
during the briefing about the safety of the airspace. Airlines which had been flying over
eastern Ukraine before 14 July continued to do so after the briefing. And airlines which
avoided the area had decided to do so previously owing to the air traffic control dispute over
Crimea.

http://www.government.nl/files/documents-and-publications/parliamentary-documents/2015/03/03/answers-to-parliamentary-questions-concerning-the-mh17-air-disaster%/etter-to-the-house-of-representatives-answering-questions-16-january.pdf

Singapore is, of course, right next door to Malaysia.

[MADem]

16. OK, so you have a list of the western airlines that ignored the danger below?

Hundreds of flights...not hundreds of airlines, is how I read it. The "airlines" listed as avoiding it were specifically "western" by and large.

And the reference to "governments" was raised in the OP. It's in the fricken SUBJECT line.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. Yes, you were totally wrong, weren't you?

"the reference to "governments" was raised in the OP."

Yes, specifically 'western', because they were the ones in the Ukrainian meeting, not the Malaysian government. The article explains:

"Because that was the duty of the foreign office: to warn the airlines and through them all travellers of the dangers over eastern Ukraine"

This isn't about the Malaysian government, or Malaysian Airlines. It's about whether the western governments who were at the briefing at which the shooting down, at considerable altitude, of a transport plane should have done more, at least in terms of warnings, than the notice issued by Ukraine telling them to fly above 32000 feet, since the thinking was that new weapons had moved into the area.

If you read 'hundreds of flights', how could you have claimed that all other governments/airlines (depending on how badly you were misunderstanding things) were avoiding the area?

[MADem]

18. You're not making any sense. First you say there's nothing said about governments and

now you're going on about them and even citing the presence of the term in the article. And I did read 'hundreds of flights' -- you quoted it. And why would it be the duty of individual western governmentS, when the duty should have fallen on the government/singular, who were briefing those in attendance where the danger lay?

You're welcome to the last word--just no point in continuing on.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. Fine - you need leading through this

The OP is an article about what governments that are described as western were told in a meeting on July 14, a few days before the plane was shot down.

You replied that Malaysia is not a western government. This doesn't seem on-topic, because no-one was talking about the Malaysian government. You went on to say

"All the other governments flew AROUND the trouble and spent money/time on fuel and re-routing to avoid the area. "

in which the errors are 'all' and 'governments', and it ignored what your own quote said - that those airlines which had avoided the area had been doing so for some time, not because of the information in the meeting.

Yes, you're now confirming you did read 'hundreds of flights' - I'm questioning why the meaning of the words never made it into your thought process, so that you could then type 'all the other governments flew AROUND the trouble'.

"why would it be the duty of individual western governmentS"

Because sometimes, governments have to consider if other governments (such as Ukraine) minimise dangers for PR purposes.