[HN Gopher] Air France cancels flights as Russia withholds clear...
___________________________________________________________________
Air France cancels flights as Russia withholds clearance
Author : underscore_ku
Score : 171 points
Date : 2021-05-31 14:10 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.reuters.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com)
| jacksonkmarley wrote:
| What does Putin get out of this? I feel like such a strong show
| of support for Lukashenko on this issue (above the existing
| general level of support) probably has some pretty significant
| strings attached.
| a-nikolaev wrote:
| My guess us that for the Russian citizens, Putin wants to show
| that: 1) Lukashenko is the good guy fighting terrorists, 2) EU
| politicians have mistreated Belavia Belarusian airlines, so
| Russia had to step in and defend their allies, 3) generally
| trying to show that he is more powerful than EU politicians.
|
| In terms of actual long-term goals, I think, he aims to replace
| Lukashenko with a new pro-Russia president, so he tries to keep
| Lukashenko happy in the process (also making him more dependent
| on Russia internationally), and proving that the two countries
| are still best allies...
| jacksonkmarley wrote:
| Something I have zero clue about, do everyday Russians see
| Belarus as an ally and Lukashenko as a good guy?
| gbuk2013 wrote:
| Yes to the first, no to the second.
|
| Lukashenko is generally derided for "sitting on two chairs"
| playing Europe against Russia (while acknowledging his
| impressive ability to do so for so many years). He also
| carried the country through the post-Soviet trouble period
| much better than most other former republics, for which he
| gets some respect.
|
| Note that he has firmly purged the government of pro-
| Russian politicians over the years so there are no
| illusions about his friendship.
| yurish wrote:
| Can confirm this.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| Russians are different. For many Lukashenko's Belarus was
| their soviet dream, carefully conserved and preserved. For
| many Lukashenko is dictator along with Putin. Some Russians
| don't even understand why Belarus is not in the Russia and
| will welcome every move to unite those countries.
|
| I don't think that there's a singular view to Belarus.
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| 80% of Russians see Lukashenka as a bad guy and a slightly
| more overt version on Putin.
| fsloth wrote:
| There has been lots of hypothetical talk about potential
| re-merging of Russia and Belarus into a single polity (they
| were practically single state during Soviet Union).
| jiofih wrote:
| He gets to force the EU to walk back on the restrictions
| imposed on Belarus. Russia's interest is to stop the EU from
| advancing (in any form) over Eastern Europe.
| relativ575 wrote:
| If Russia's goal is to stop Eastern Europe to become
| unfriendly, then they already fail, since most of countries
| that Russia themselves consider "unfriendly" are already in
| that region -- Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Georgia, Ukraine,
| Poland, Czech (in addition to the US and UK)
|
| https://estonianworld.com/security/russia-puts-estonia-on-
| th...
| alisonkisk wrote:
| He wants Easter Europe subservient and afraid, not
| "friendly".
| jacksonkmarley wrote:
| Good point about resisting EU control of Eastern Europe,
| although this doesn't seem like the optimal way to do that.
| Maybe this is step one, then step two is to cut a deal that
| imposes some limits on Belarus' actions but puts Russia in
| the control seat of negotiations etc.
| pydry wrote:
| This week has been win/win/win for Putin and Lukashenko. The EU
| cutting ties with Belarus pushes the Belarussian people further
| into Russia's arms. Lukashenko got to cast terror into the
| heart of the opposition movement.
|
| Russia needs the countries on its European border. It is
| completely exposed militarily - flat lands leading all the way
| to its heartland routinely used by invaders. It already has two
| NATO countries on its border and another country (Ukraine) that
| has asked to join. The last thing it needs is a wall of NATO
| countries pressed up against its jugular.
|
| Having Belarus on side is critical for them.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| Completely exposed to who? The US? Germany? Lithuania? Who
| exactly is going to take advantage of this terrain and drive
| an army into Russia?
|
| Nobody, that's who.
|
| I'll tell you what Putin's really afraid of. He's afraid of
| Russians figuring out that the people in the USSR who wound
| up aligned with the west are better off than the people who
| are under Putin. He's afraid of _that_ reality creeping too
| close to his borders.
|
| (Now, in fairness, it was absolutely absurd that _France_
| would invade Russia... until it happened. But if Putin wants
| buffers big enough to prevent that from happening, then he 's
| going to need to control both Germany and France. There are
| no buffers big enough to disarm Russia's fears, unless you
| give them at least all of Europe. And maybe you'd have to
| give them the whole planet.)
| URSpider94 wrote:
| In general, Putin seems to be willing to invest on the side of
| any strongman, to support their ultimate right to take any
| action to put down their opposition.
| [deleted]
| supergirl wrote:
| do people really not remember
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident or
| are they conveniently forgetting it? it's an established
| practice.
|
| "According to Bolivia, the flight was rerouted to Austria when
| France, Spain, Portugal and Italy[2] reportedly denied access to
| their airspace, allegedly due to suspicions that Snowden was on
| board".
| antocv wrote:
| The narrative is "that was different and totally valid course
| of action while we must now keep pointing fingers at Belarus
| look at how bad they are" and "disregard that Spain apologized
| to Bolivia".
| maratc wrote:
| Russian and Belarusian propagandists like to disseminate
| superficially similar comparisons like this in order to
| distract people from their own malfeasance.
|
| One big difference is that RyanAir was a commercial flight, and
| it's covered by the International Air Services Transit
| Agreement (IASTA), which protects the right to fly over a
| country's airspace in order to travel between two other
| countries. Evo Morales plane, on the other hand, belongs to
| Bolivian Air Force[0]. IASTA applies only to civil aviation
| (RyanAir), not to military flights (Evo Morales).
|
| Second difference is that France and Italy denied that military
| flight the right to _enter_ their airspace, which is entirely
| in their right. Iran and North Korea can similarly deny Biden
| the right to pass over them in Air Force One. Belarus, on the
| other hand, waited till RyanAir aircraft was 30 minutes in
| their airspace, and then -- instead of asking it to leave it
| asap -- forced it to land by sending a fighter jet.
|
| Third difference is that in Evo Morales case, nobody used a
| (clearly fake) bomb threat.
|
| So no, people do remember that. These are two cases that are
| superficially similar, but very different in practice.
|
| [0] https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/fab-001
| h_anna_h wrote:
| Please don't call people "Russian and Belarusian
| propagandists" just for pointing out political hypocrisy.
|
| As for the differences they seem like technical legal details
| that do not really change the situation.
|
| But if you want other similar cases then here is one: https:/
| /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achille_Lauro_hijacking#Interc...
| myko wrote:
| Russia has been getting away with far too much for far too long
| on the international stage. Putin is out of control. The rest of
| the world should extract their people and ban all flights in/out
| of Russia.
| amelius wrote:
| If only there was a psychological test for world leaders like
| we have for astronauts.
| [deleted]
| ridiculous_leke wrote:
| Countries in the east, except Japan and South Korea will never
| do that.
| fsloth wrote:
| Russia has too much delicious raw materials - oil, gas and
| minerals. Now, for a country that does not export anything the
| world economy requires, it is simple to close it off, like
| Cuba. If Cuba produced oil and minerals it would not be so
| isolated. Nobody wants to stop trading with Russia.
|
| So there is the global economic game, and then there is the
| global political game. All we ever talk about in media is the
| political game since it's easy to digest in sound bites, but
| the economics are running the real decision process as much as
| the politics.
| h_anna_h wrote:
| This was just an (expected) reaction to the banning of Belarusian
| airlines by the EU. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27273752
| dontbenebby wrote:
| So to clarify: Belarus forced a plane to land, the French try to
| respect the autonomy of both, now they're banning flights?
|
| I had half joked I wanted to take the Moscow -> Bejing train at
| some point , but I guess I'll reasses (my IRL contacts know how
| much I absolutely LOVE trains), but shit like this makes me
| inclined to keep spending that money on overpriced coffee or
| whatever.
|
| I looked at the data[1], and Russia made ~11 _b_ illion dollars
| from tourism in 2015, so they must really value being petty since
| reading these things make them sound unwelcoming, unfriendly, and
| straight up antisocial.
|
| [1] a pdf in they wayback machine cited on wikipedia
| https://web.archive.org/web/20150112082549/http://www.e-unwt...
| jabajabadu wrote:
| Sadly, the criminal gang that runs Russia is not interested in
| the economic prosperity of its citizens. They want ordinary
| people to stay poor and isolated since this makes them so much
| easier to control. They fully understand (and welcome) the
| consequences of their actions.
| vmception wrote:
| Can you shed some more light on this? Russia has been an
| accounting game since the fall of the soviet union:
| underpriced shares, diverted revenue/dividend to insiders,
| lucrative resource or revenue generating assets sold opaquely
| and also underpriced
|
| Does this end at some point? Where there are no more formerly
| state owned resources to pillage and convert to
| Euros/CHF/USD?
| lmilcin wrote:
| > Russia has been an accounting game since the fall of the
| soviet union
|
| Again, the argument is that _it does not matter_. As long
| as the people in power are well compensated the general
| wellbeing of federation is of little consequence.
|
| It is pretty simple. People who barely scrape by have no
| time, resources or focus to be fighting. They can't have
| too much or too little.
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| To put things in perspective, Russia's oil and gas contributes
| [?]5.2T ($720B in USD) to the federal budget alone:
|
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/1028682/russia-federal-b...
| CalChris wrote:
| And those revenues have been in steep decline.
|
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/1028682/russia-
| federal-b...
| loceng wrote:
| Are there not other bad actor(s) mostly aligned with Putin
| who could start buying u all their oil if say a war broke
| out, or are we passed that type of war needing so much such
| natural resources, or perhaps those countries have enough
| oil reserves/production already?
| giarc wrote:
| This is just a guess, but the former Soviet union
| countries that potentially would re-align with Russia
| aren't huge countries with big oil appetites. They likely
| don't have the means to start buying up billions of
| dollars in Russian oil.
| kordlessagain wrote:
| But hacking is up!
| deanCommie wrote:
| So to clarify: Did you read the article?
|
| > The French airline, part of the broader Air France-KLM group,
| was forced to cancel two Paris-Moscow flights last week after
| receiving no Russian clearance for flight plans skirting the
| territory.
|
| > Obstacles to rerouted Air France flights appeared to have
| been resolved late last week, allowing Air France to carry out
| two weekend Paris-Moscow services.
|
| Sounds like Russian Authorities just took an extra beat
| (maliciously, or incompetently), or maybe the initial requested
| plan came too close to some military facility that the Russians
| had an alteration request over.
|
| Either way, the wire services immediately smelled news even
| though by the time it was ready to publish, the issue was
| already resolved... so what's the news here?
|
| edit: I apologize for my snark. I responded to you because you
| were the top comment. But it seems like that _NONE_ of the
| other commenters read the article either. Apalling.
|
| edit2: Keeping all my original content above for posterity but
| clearly I was wrong - jasode below clarified things.
| jasode wrote:
| _> Did you read the article? [...] But it seems like that
| NONE of the other commenters read the article either. _
|
| Maybe we're all confused readers because the Reuter articles
| make the timeline hard to follow.
|
| _> , the issue was already resolved... so what's the news
| here?_
|
| The timestamp for Reuter's own linked article about the
| "resolved last week" flight routes was May 29:
| https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russia-
| ap...
|
| But this thread's article's timestamp is May 31 with _new
| issues_ about the routes around Belarus that Russia is
| denying clearance for.
| deanCommie wrote:
| Yes, you're absolutely right.
| cm2187 wrote:
| Where did you see that this is now resolved?
| [deleted]
| yongjik wrote:
| I always wonder what's the endgame for Russia. In terms of
| national GDP, it's sitting between Canada and South Korea. Can
| you imagine Canada hoarding nukes and sending troops for
| "vacation"? I don't think Canada could afford to, even if they
| wanted to (which, thankfully, they don't).
|
| ...Is Russia slowly bankrupting itself by pretending to be its
| former self?
| pydry wrote:
| It's trying to protect its western border. There are no
| mountains there. It's flat terrain leading right up to their
| heartland that has been invaded multiple times throughout
| history. The vulnerability they feel on this border is so
| intense it has shaped the national psyche.
|
| Two countries (Latvia and Estonia) have already flipped to
| the west (NATO members). Ukraine is torn between Russia and
| the west (that's what Maidan morphed into after starting off
| as an anti corruption protest). Lukashenko was engaged in a
| struggle with pro western opponents.
|
| There's a proxy war going on on its borders. I don't think
| this is about Russia trying to dominate the world. I think
| it's about Russia wanting to buffer its most exposed border.
|
| If Western Canada joined in an alliance with Russia and
| Eastern Canada was run by a pro American dictator do you
| think America would behave differently?
| wussboy wrote:
| I understand what you're thinking and I suspect you're
| correct. What I find baffling is that they feel they need
| to "protect" they're border at all. From whom? For why? Are
| the Germans going to suddenly roll their tanks towards the
| Urals? As a mindset it seems so... 1910.
| pydry wrote:
| They're trying to edge the balance of power in the region
| to their favor. The US is doing the opposite. It's a slow
| ratchet effect that's been going on since the 1950s.
|
| If they gave up entirely on their foreign policy
| objectives a more likely scenario than tanks would be the
| Russian State ending up a fragmented, powerless mess.
|
| I don't imagine a US led NATO coalition immediately
| rolling tanks into Moscow if all 5 countries flip to
| NATO, but stirring up a separatist movement on the
| borders of Belarus or Ukraine and then "helping" out?
| Definitely.
|
| I don't for one second believe that the US will instantly
| grind to a halt after creeping up on the Russian border
| for 70 years.
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| Creeping up to their border? Yeah, let's look at how that
| actually happened.
|
| As soon as Poland had a chance, they wanted into the EU
| or NATO, preferably both. _They_ , Poland, desperately
| wanted in. Why? _Because they wanted protection from
| Russia_ , and with good historical reason.
|
| Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania? Same story. It wasn't
| that the US had a nefarious plot to ensnare the border
| countries in a US-dominated alliance. They _desperately_
| wanted in, because they have experience with being
| overrun by Russia.
|
| If Russia doesn't like this, maybe they should work on
| making their neighbors not feel so afraid of Russia.
| Things like the Ukraine and Georgia? They are not
| helping.
| csdreamer7 wrote:
| Indeed. Even Finland is quite worried about war with
| Russia.
|
| https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-12/fin
| lan...
| stingraycharles wrote:
| Given all the shenanigans Russia has been involved in in
| the past, say, 10 years on their Western borders, I think
| it has been far too offensive and controversial to "just"
| be about defense and protecting its border. It's an
| offensive game, such as what happened with the Crimea.
|
| I think this comment is far too apologetic.
| pydry wrote:
| Crimea was about protecting their naval base in
| Sevastopol - the only all year warm water naval base that
| they have.
| mastax wrote:
| Novorossiysk?
| ArtemZ wrote:
| Russian wages are MUCH lower than they are in Canada or South
| Korea. Average salary is something like ~500 USD per month,
| while in Canada it is closer to 5000 USD, so it is a way
| cheaper to operate nukes and send troops everywhere for
| Russia.
|
| And if you think that nuclear engineers are making
| significantly more than an average Ivan, then I have a bad
| news for you, that's unlikely. For example, a friend of mine
| works for a subcontractor of Roscosmos (Russian space
| activities corporation, basically russian "NASA") as an
| electronic measurements instrumentation engineer and makes
| 60000 rubles per month before taxes (roughly 850$ per month).
| That's a joke of a salary and he is only able to work there
| because he is owning a property in Moscow.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| The tourists that Russia cares about are not flying Air France.
| They come and go on their own planes.
| jryle70 wrote:
| Who are they and how much they contribute compared to
| millions visiting Russia every year?
| novok wrote:
| If they really liked tourism, they would give tourist visas on
| arrival like all the other tourist loving countries, not make
| you go through a visa application song and dance.
| cm2187 wrote:
| By cancelling foreign flights to and from Moscow, I am not sure
| who Putin thinks he is hurting most.
| postsantum wrote:
| This is not an unexpected move. In Russia, we even have an
| established phrase that refers to the common situation of
| hurting own citizens under the pretext of imposing sanctions on
| foreign powers
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| <<nazlo mame otmorozhu ushi>> or <<importozameshchenie>>?
| postsantum wrote:
| Razbombit' Voronezh which means bomb out the city of
| Voronezh
|
| https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B
| 8...
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| If in doubt, nado bombit' Voronezh
| mynegation wrote:
| Out of curiosity - what is this phrase? "Ni sebe, ni liudiam"
| - (lit: "Not for one self, not for the people"), "Sobaka na
| sene" ("Dog on the hay"), "Napugali ezha goloi zadnitsei"
| ("Scare the hedgehog with the bare butt") or is it something
| more specific to the situation?
| popileviz wrote:
| In the case of sanctions or other similar political action
| - "bombit' Voronezh" - "bombing Voronezh"
| mmmBacon wrote:
| This phrase seems like a WW2 reference as Voronezh was
| the site of a great battle. Care to elaborate on the
| context/origin?
| pas wrote:
| It seems the phrase originates post-2008, with not much
| to do with WW2
|
| https://en.public-welfare.com/4135353-quotbomb-
| voronezhquot-...
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B1%
| D0%...
| kofejnik wrote:
| how about "bei svoikh, chtob chuzhie boialis'"
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| Chtoby chuzhie boialis', svoikh posil'nee bei!
| nolok wrote:
| Such a weird move.
|
| I want to start by saying I'm not sure Air France should be
| subsidized to the level we do. Its workers rules from the 80s are
| just not adapted anymore and protecting them with public money
| against normal competition is stupid. And I don't mean when
| compared to oil-funded middle east airlines (which are eating
| everyone's lunch in europe on an unfair basis), but compared with
| others EU airlines. KLM is being abused to pay for Air France's
| bills, for exemple, that's just wrong. They tried to push into
| low cost workers stopped it, they tried to keep competitive with
| high cost workers complained, it's stupid and weird. It has giant
| potential but we're ruining it.
|
| With that said, Russia trying to punch our national carrier down
| means they guarantee we won't let Air France hurt too much. Why
| would Russia try to play the economic game against a country so
| much richer than it is a question I can't answer. Probably
| because we don't depend on their oil nor gaz and since that's
| virtually the only thing they do they don't have any thing else
| than their giant airspace to get back at us ...
|
| All of that to say: Air France stock holders are probably happy
| at that news.
| baybal2 wrote:
| > Such a weird move.
|
| > I want to start by saying I'm not sure Air France should be
| subsidized to the level we do.
|
| This is the point. It's pork barrel of a flag carrier being
| under a gunpoint. The message is "I will not let even your most
| overpriced, over-subsidised, bathing in cash airline to make
| money"
|
| I'm not sure if the idea above makes sense to somebody in
| American cultural context.
| hodgesrm wrote:
| The US had a 40 year cold war with Russia. This looks like
| the standard playbook. The rules regarding flights into
| Berlin from the West were a game.
|
| Great power politics don't change a lot.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Berlin_Air_Corridor
| _ph_ wrote:
| Not sure why you think this move is weird. Air France submitted
| flight plans, which didn't get clearance, so they don't fly.
| Jabbles wrote:
| The weird part is this:
|
| "which didn't get clearance"
|
| not this part:
|
| "so they don't fly"
| _ph_ wrote:
| Well, it seems that Russia is trying to play games. I just
| don't see how Russia can benefit from those.
| KMag wrote:
| They may be trying to signal they're willing to cut of
| their nose to spite their face in order to dissuade
| France from pushing for deeper sanctions if the Belarus
| situation further deteriorates.
| ehnto wrote:
| They were saying it was weird for Russia not to give
| clearance.
| jasode wrote:
| _> Such a weird move. [...] Russia trying to punch our national
| carrier down_
|
| It doesn't seem weird if Russia has a history of using its
| valuable airspace as a geopolitical weapon. (A 10 min video
| about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdNDYBt9e_U)
|
| France's Macron was vocal about EU issuing sanctions against
| Belarus. Putin supports Belarus and in a tit-for-tat show, they
| denied Russia clearance to Air France flights. The motivations
| for economic punishments from both sides seem obvious.
| WanderPanda wrote:
| > Probably because we don't depend on their oil nor gaz and
| since that's virtually the only thing they do they don't have
| any thing else than their giant airspace to get back at us.
|
| I don't want to miss my dear JetBrains products ;)
| underscore_ku wrote:
| JetBrains is Czech
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| US is "so much richer" than Russia. China is "so much richer"
| than Russia.
|
| France is not "so much richer" than Russia. You chop 40% of
| France's GDP and that's the GDP of Russia. Sure that's bigger
| but then Russia has 2x the amount of people and... 30x the
| country size. 30x.
|
| I have absolutely zero doubts that Russia is going to overtake
| France's GDP in a not so distant future.
|
| Since losing the Waterloo battle France went from world's 1st
| superpower (debatable) to 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th (in the eighties
| and maybe still in the nineties?), then 6th and now 7th. And
| the path seems pretty clear to me.
|
| (I'm not russian btw and I don't approve what Russia is doing
| here but I know how "cocorico" french people can be and I
| wouldn't want others to be mislead so I simply present facts:
| chop 40% of France's GDP and you've got Russia's GDP. Russia
| has 2x the population and 30x the land of France)
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| And what evidence do you see that the GDP of Russia is going
| to grow faster than that of France?
| detritus wrote:
| Mmm, I have much the same misgivings about the likes of EDF
| being allowed to go on spending sprees in other countres -
| including my own, Britain - when they are mostly owned by the
| French state.
|
| At the less knuckle-dragging end of the Brexit voting spectrum,
| stuff like this showed a clear two-tier level of behaviour in
| the EU and was hard to rationalise in the minds of people
| somewhat on the fence.
|
| I know that I - as a Remain voter - had an on-going irritation
| at the situation. Samesame huge state/EU loans to the likes of
| Spain's Ferrovial to go on spending sprees here too.
|
| Perhaps if we'd as a country had a bit more spine and a bit
| less hesitance to occasionally mangle EU rules to our favour as
| our continental cousins were, our industrial Brexit-supporters
| (Dyson et al) might not have felt they were being so unduly
| hard done by.
|
| Oh well, it matters not any more.
| Rexxar wrote:
| > Mmm, I have much the same misgivings about the likes of EDF
| being allowed to go on spending sprees in other countres -
| including my own, Britain - when they are mostly owned by the
| French state.
|
| This was a UK political choice, this could have been manage
| differently by UK government.
|
| > Perhaps if we'd as a country had a bit more spine and a bit
| less hesitance to occasionally mangle EU rules to our favour
|
| UK is the country that has mangle EU rules the most.
| pigscantfly wrote:
| > UK is the country that has mangle EU rules the most.
|
| Can you explain what you mean by this? To me, it's always
| seemed that Germany and France benefit most from EU
| integration at the expense of the southern nations which
| have less industrialized export economies. I'm American,
| but my two cofounders are British and Swiss, so European
| politics is a pretty common topic of discussion.
| pjc50 wrote:
| > EDF being allowed to go on spending sprees in other
| countres - including my own, Britain
|
| Ssh, the only way we can get Hinkley Point C built at
| anything like reasonable cost is if the French government
| bails it out! :)
|
| The British counterpart didn't fare so well:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Nuclear_Fuels_Ltd
| detritus wrote:
| I'd rather we threw whatever guaranteeing stake the UK
| government owes into supporting Hinkcley instead to the
| likes of Rolls Royce and modular small-scale nuclear, which
| seems to me a better use of fission nuclear in the
| [hopeful] interim between now and fusion hopefully becoming
| A Thing in a decade (or five).
|
| Heck, given how much money the current administration's
| spunked, we could just add some more zeroes to the deficit
| and double up... .
|
| But yes, you're not wrong :)
|
| - ed - the loss of the British Nuclear industry's one of
| the last generation's stupidest mess-ups.
| Daishiman wrote:
| > Perhaps if we'd as a country had a bit more spine and a bit
| less hesitance to occasionally mangle EU rules to our favour
| as our continental cousins were, our industrial Brexit-
| supporters (Dyson et al) might not have felt they were being
| so unduly hard done by.
|
| The British finance industry made out by bandits by having
| the best of EU, UK and worldwide financial markets. UK kept a
| much tighter control of its currency than mainland EU
| countries, and did pressure _constantly_ to get EU rulings in
| its favor.
| detritus wrote:
| Yes, I know - we played the game _within the constraints of
| the rules_ available, for better or worse as far as the
| development of the Community was concerned. Our political
| overlords have played that game forever, particularly since
| the UK rebate.
|
| Strangely, that rebate was mostly because of antagonism
| about French support for its food industries... .
|
| That we've still not had a resolution to our financial
| market's future engagement with the EU shows how
| fundamentally [expletive]-ing stupid and utterly short-
| sighted Brexit was. Idiots, all.
| omarish wrote:
| Why is it unfair that middle eastern carriers are offering a
| better product at a lower price?
| Glavnokoman wrote:
| Allegedly because they get subsidies from the oil states. I
| personally do not know if above is true. Maybe they are just
| more effective not having to coordinate every move with
| unions and not having extra costs due to some stupid
| political moves. Maybe both. Maybe none...
| dotancohen wrote:
| So could France then tax the Arab oil to even the score?
| The tax revenue could even partially subsidize Air France
| to compete with the Arab airlines.
| qwytw wrote:
| Last time they tried it caused massive protests and
| unrest in France, so the government had to scrap the nex
| taxes...
| papertokyo wrote:
| Isn't this what the 'yellow vest' protests were
| (initially) about?
| baud147258 wrote:
| gas is already heavily taxed in France and then Air
| France is getting subsides
| DangitBobby wrote:
| It's hard to compete with the next-door-neighbor kids'
| lemonade stand when their daddy gives them free sugar and
| lemons. Or something like that.
| Cantinflas wrote:
| Price dumping paid by oil&gas profits --> bye bye competition
| --> monopoly (duopoly?)
| JPLeRouzic wrote:
| > Its workers rules from the 80s are just not adapted anymore
|
| I once spoke with an Air France flight attendant on a domestic
| flight (Paris => Rennes) and she told me that her employment
| contract was governed by Irish law. She was French. I don't
| know if this is representative of all the flight staff status.
| But for me it is a bit weird that a French company, owned by
| the French state, employs French people under an Irish status.
| chki wrote:
| The parent company of Air France is AirFrance-KLM which is a
| publicly traded company. France and the Netherlands are the
| largest shareholders and hold about 14 and 12 % of the stock
| each. So it is probably not correct to identify Air France as
| a company owned by the French State.
|
| As a publicly traded company they are to some extent required
| to choose employment options that are financially beneficial,
| I would guess that's happening here.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| Would also think a big enough airline may have staff based
| in other countries. Being Air France staff based in Dublin
| wouldn't let you fill many hours if you could only work on
| journey between Ireland and france.
|
| There's probably some union rules restricting them from
| working exclusively outside of the country they're based.
| hef19898 wrote:
| That became quite common, also for pilots. Apparently these
| jobs became so sought after that non-flag carriers, RyanAir
| being among the main offenders apparently, have their co-
| pilots pay to get the flight hours to keep their license.
| Gone are the days of lofty, high paid airline jobs. Even gone
| are the days you don't have to pay for pilot training, let
| alone being paid as airline trainee.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| As long as there's no official stance from Russia, I would
| consider those cancels to be caused by technical issues. Probably
| it's not that easy to re-route many flights very quickly.
| elvis70 wrote:
| Mirror: https://archive.is/LFfCp
| Rohpakle wrote:
| Doing this creates an inconvenience for Europe. The Russians like
| it when Europe has inconveniences. It also (in)directly shows
| support for Belarus, forcing the dictator of that country to
| become even more reliant on Russia/Putin than he already was, and
| European sanctions play into this. This way Belarus continues to
| be a buffer state between the EU and Russia, maintaining the
| status quo in that region for now. It is a low-risk move for
| Russia, while having the potential to pay-off in the future
| should Belarus ever need any favors.
| jdjgktntnrk wrote:
| Putin is betting Air France will put pressure on the French gov
| which will pressure EU.
|
| Sadly, he's probably right. EU has a habit of "forgetting" about
| human rights when it gets in the way of profit.
|
| See the two French military ships which were supposed to be sold
| to Russia in 2014, and which ended in Turkey (another human
| rights bastion).
|
| See the Nordstream gas pipeline to Russia.
|
| See the total inaction regarding the downing of the MH14 flight.
| pmorici wrote:
| Seems like bureaucratic symbolism. I can't imagine there are many
| people who want to avoid being nabbed in Belarus but would still
| feel comfortable traveling to Russia.
| oilbagz wrote:
| More like a tit-for-tat show of support for Belarus on the part
| of the Russians.
|
| I saw a televised meeting between Putin and Lukashenko
| yesterday that ended with Lukashenko making the statement that
| went something like "the Bolsheviks rose to great heights, and
| we will match them", to which Putin chuckled, demurely. Its
| maybe not obvious to Westerners, but they are trying to rebuild
| a "Union of ex-Soviet States" in the region these days .. one
| by one, preparing a Bloc that can be an attractive partner to
| the EU, I suppose.
|
| With these kinds of tit-for-tat responses, though, I guess its
| a shrewd strategy. "If we are allowed into the EU econo-bloc,
| such re-routes won't be necessary", seems to be the planned
| negotiating point ..
| _ph_ wrote:
| First of all, I do not see any indication that Russia or
| Belarus tries to get closer to the EU, rather the opposite.
| And this kind of blocking policy increases the separation.
| Also, it takes really a lot to have the EU make any decision
| within short notice, but Lukashenko definitely managed.
| marktangotango wrote:
| > Also, it takes really a lot to have the EU make any
| decision within short notice, but Lukashenko definitely
| managed.
|
| This is a cogent observation.
| pmorici wrote:
| They only have control on flights in and out of Russia though
| so how much leverage can it really provide? All the EU
| airlines can just say sure we will fly over Belarus on the
| way to Moscow while still avoiding it on every other city
| pair that doesn't involve a Russian destination. That is why
| I say it seems largely symbolic.
| _ph_ wrote:
| Why would any European airline fly over Belarus while the
| incident isn't resolved? No airline should fly over states
| which intercepts civil airliners in transit.
| philistine wrote:
| My understanding is that you can intercept a plane in
| transit in your airspace. The problem is that Belarus
| lied when they said they had information of a bomb
| onboard.
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| Another problem is the kidnapping of a passenger who then
| got promptly very sick and damaged in the friendly heavy
| hands of the KGB and police. You know, the usual thing
| the totalitarians do.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| Eh, how is Assange doing? People are being treated well
| in Guantanamo? Didn't Austria divert a flight on merely
| the suspicion that Snowden might be onboard? Or does that
| not count because it was just the President of Bolivia's
| official government jet and not a Ryanair flight?
|
| Fair enough if you want to criticize Russia for being a
| kleptocracy that assassinates enemies on foreign soil,
| but diversion of flights to capture enemies of the state
| and then not treating them well in captivity is
| unfortunately not a hallmark of totalitarian regimes but
| a general feature of western statecraft as well, so let's
| not blow this tit-for-tat response out of proportion.
| WesolyKubeczek wrote:
| Listen, two wrongs don't make one right, ever heard of
| such notion?
| pmorici wrote:
| I suppose it depends on your view of what the problem is
| and what the purpose of the fly over moratorium is.
|
| Practically I view the fly over ban as protecting
| passengers and property from being unduly seized by
| Belarus.
|
| Since Belarus and Russia have close ties flying a plane
| into Russia at all seems about the same risk as flying
| that plane over and into Belarus.
| _ph_ wrote:
| Yes, Russia, like any other state, could intercept
| airplanes too. But so far, they have not. International
| air travel means, that you have to fly across many
| countries, if you want to fly in a somewhat straight
| line. There are a few exceptions, where flights are not
| permitted to cross a countries airspace, but intercepting
| approved flights is pretty much unheard of. That is why
| the actions from Lukashenko created so much outrage. It
| is one of the fundamental agreements of international
| flights that got violated. If Russia would start
| intercepting airplanes, they would be internationally
| isolated quite quickly.
| jopsen wrote:
| > "Union of ex-Soviet States" Like:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Economic_Union
|
| Isn't that great? We're not going to allow non-democratic
| countries like Russia into the EU. Certainly not when they
| are so clearly documenting that they have zero credibility,
| no treaty Russia signs can be trusted. So it's probably fine
| that they make own club.
|
| I mean what else would we expect them to do?
| drran wrote:
| Convert to democratic states, or self-disassemble, or both.
| [deleted]
| Glavnokoman wrote:
| "withholds" seem very misleading here. The article says they did
| not get the clearance for the new route which is something very
| different.
|
| [edit] My bad. Said rubbish. Apparently my understanding of this
| word is different from the common.
| ncallaway wrote:
| Not giving something is withholding it. I don't see how that's
| possibly misleading, it seems like the straightforward
| definition of the word.
| Glavnokoman wrote:
| I was under impression that word is usually used in the sense
| of taking something back. Could be wrong though.
| Glavnokoman wrote:
| A! And apparently I was wrong. OK, my fault.
| ncallaway wrote:
| No worries, and no fault at all!
|
| You might've been getting mixed up with the word
| "withdraw", which means essentially what you described
| (to revoke, or to take away).
| mlyle wrote:
| No, withhold means to "not give". It has the connotation,
| often, of not giving something that is due or expected or
| customary-- which also fits the bill here.
| chinathrow wrote:
| This whole development surrounding the diversion of a Ryanair
| flight to Minsk is interesting as it shows clearly how two nation
| states are trying out to see what they can get away with.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Germany should cancel Nord Stream 2. Shot across the bow of
| Gazprom and Russia.
| haram_masala wrote:
| That would be much more than a shot across the bow, given how
| much the Russian economy and federal budget depends on gas
| revenues.
| cheph wrote:
| Maybe Russia can get it's shit in order?
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Why create a billions of dollars worth investment ruin when
| we can also complete it and go the "stick and carrots" route?
| Let it sit but demand concessions from Putin. He wants to
| sell the gas, after all...
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Germany should cancel Nord Stream 2. Shot across the bow
| of Gazprom and Russia_
|
| Unlikely to happen until Merkel is out. She has been
| incredibly weak when it comes to Russia.
| quonn wrote:
| That would likely hurt Germany (by reducing options).
| morelisp wrote:
| A stronger Russia, weaker Europe, and changing climate hurt
| Germany considerably more in the long run.
|
| (Shame our politicians can't see past autumn...)
| cheph wrote:
| So anything goes as long as Germany comes first? And
| really, is it in Germany's interests to support
| dictatorships as the wave of illiberalism rolls further
| west? How exactly?
|
| Germany and it's neo empire, AKA EU, is spineless and
| pathetic and deserves to die the slow death it is facing
| while China and Russia crushes the last hope and light left
| in the world. Germany just can't help itself, time and
| again making the world a worse place. Germans truly learnt
| nothing, disingenuously saying "never again" while
| gladhanding with a authoritarian power openly engaging in
| genocide: https://neveragainrightnow.com/
| throwaway210222 wrote:
| Well since Russia is now the USA's largest external
| supplier of oil [1], perhaps they can get the ball
| rolling? No need to whine at the Germans.
|
| [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-24/ru
| ssia-oi...
|
| Who again is spineless?
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _perhaps they can get the ball rolling?_
|
| A European plane with European passengers was downed. No
| Americans. Putin would not have signed off on a similar
| operation with an American plane.
|
| U.S. geopolitical focus is presently in the Pacific.
| Getting sidetracked with whatever is going on between
| Berlin and Moscow doesn't serve our interests.
| makomk wrote:
| I don't think the USA is particularly reliant on any
| external supplies of oil these days, whereas the same
| cannot be said for Europe and gas.
| throwaway210222 wrote:
| Then surely it makes it even easier for the USA to
| decline said Russian oil?
|
| Come, show those Germans what decisive, principled action
| looks like.
| cheph wrote:
| Europe has consistently been a bigger trading partner
| with Russia: https://oec.world/en/profile/country/rus?sub
| natTradeValueSel...
|
| And can't Germany do anything right without US holding
| their hand? But to be fair yes, Biden is equally pathetic
| and sad for gladhanding with Russia.
| Mountain_Skies wrote:
| How will the US make up for that oil? Not through
| internal drilling and extraction as the environmental
| wing of the party in power would never allow it. Closer
| ties to Middle Eastern states that have their own
| terrible human rights abuses?
| areyousure wrote:
| Your own article says Russia is the third-largest
| supplier.
| [deleted]
| beefield wrote:
| I think that would be a shot at the bow. A shot across the
| bow would be to maybe stop buying gas from Russia for a week
| or two during the summer. I have no clue how much that would
| cost, but I have started to think that it might make sense
| also as an supply chain disruption exercise.
| bombcar wrote:
| Does Germany have other sources available to it? Otherwise
| it'd be like a "boycott" where you just move the purchases
| to another day.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| They should threaten to recommission their nukes.
| throwaway210222 wrote:
| Why would that bother Russia?
|
| They already have _thousands_ pointing at them and about
| seven thousand ready to fly back anyone dumb enough to
| attack them.
|
| A few more German nukes doesn't change their risk at all.
| stickfigure wrote:
| I believe parent is referring to nuclear power stations,
| which Germany began phasing out after Fukushima.
| KMag wrote:
| Germany has never had nuclear weapons of its own, though
| the US has had around 60 warheads in Buchel (edit: and
| currently probably has about about 20 warheads) as part
| of the NATO Nuclear Sharing deterrent, and the Soviet
| Union deployed some nuclear warheads in East Germany for
| a time.
|
| Edit: maybe thousands of warheads were in Germany at the
| height of the cold war, though a quick look through
| Wikipedia isn't clear about the peak number of warheads.
| detaro wrote:
| correction: _are_ stationed in Buchel
|
| During the cold wars, there were at times thousands of
| warheads in Germany.
| KMag wrote:
| Thanks. I know a guy who was trained to place demolition
| charges on the US warheads in Buchel in case the base was
| overrun, and I had gotten the false impression from him
| that all of the warheads had since been removed.
| jdjgktntnrk wrote:
| They could import it from US. Not sure how much more
| expensive that would be, especially since Russia has a
| strong reason to have a very competitive price (since
| supplying EU is also a strategic asset)
| ArkanExplorer wrote:
| Former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder oversaw the
| shutdown of Germany's nuclear industry. He is now chairman of
| the Russian gas conglomerate Rosneft.
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41447603
|
| The shutdown of Germany's nukes is a result of corruption at
| the most senior level, and represents one of the greatest
| betrayals of the German people, of Europe, and of indeed the
| planet given the additional emissions.
|
| If the EU is really serious about Russian and energy
| independence, they should be begin a mass program of nuclear
| power building across the bloc.
|
| But its more likely that all of the senior European
| bureaucrats and politicians are corrupted at some level.
| morsch wrote:
| Corruption, and, you know, widespread support among the
| German population. So I guess a betrayal of the Germans, by
| the Germans.
|
| https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/deutschlandtrend/deutschla
| n... (2011)
|
| https://atomkraftwerkeplag.wikia.org/de/wiki/Meinungsumfrag
| e...
| ArkanExplorer wrote:
| If you explained to those same people that the
| replacement is going to involve a lot of coal and Russian
| gas, and that the decision was based on a corrupted
| chancellor, would they still support the decision?
|
| If the chancellor was corrupted, then what about senior
| media controllers and leaders of the Greens movement?
| [deleted]
| matwood wrote:
| s/interesting/concerning. This is the type of thing that leads
| to wars.
| thepangolino wrote:
| I'm starting to wonder why Belarus didn't just shoot that plane
| down and blame Russian tourists or something. Would have
| probably caused less trouble.
| jopsen wrote:
| I think the response would have been more prompt, and a lot
| harder for people to ignore.
|
| Tourism in Belarus would disappear instantly..
|
| Note. when Russia* shot down a commerical jet over Ukraine,
| it probably was a mistake. At-least the opposite is far fetch
| we're willing to believe it wasn't intentional.
|
| * We can also say pro-russian separatists, but they are
| probably one and the same.
| pjc50 wrote:
| I get a very strong sense that the Iron Curtain is being
| rebuilt. Hopefully this time further to the east.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-05-31 23:02 UTC)