15 ms·

Air France cancels flights as Russia withholds clearance

191 points by underscore_ku 5y ago

nolok 5y ago
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.
- _ph_ 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    The weird part is this: "which didn't get clearance" not this part: "so they don't fly"
    - _ph_ 5y ago
      Well, it seems that Russia is trying to play games. I just don't see how Russia can benefit from those.
      - KMag 5y ago
        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 5y ago
    They were saying it was weird for Russia not to give clearance.
- detritus 5y ago
  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.
  - Daishiman 5y ago
    > 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 5y ago
      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.
  - pjc50 5y ago
    > 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Nuclear_Fuels_Ltd
- omarish 5y ago
  Why is it unfair that middle eastern carriers are offering a better product at a lower price?
  - DangitBobby 5y ago
    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 5y ago
    Price dumping paid by oil&gas profits --> bye bye competition --> monopoly (duopoly?)
  - Glavnokoman 5y ago
    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 5y ago
      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 5y ago
        Last time they tried it caused massive protests and unrest in France, so the government had to scrap the nex taxes...
        papertokyo 5y ago
        Isn't this what the 'yellow vest' protests were (initially) about?
      - 5y ago
- jasode 5y ago
  >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 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.
- JPLeRouzic 5y ago
  > 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 5y ago
    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 5y ago
      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 5y ago
    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.
- baybal2 5y ago
  > 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 5y ago
    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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Berlin_Air_Corridor
- WanderPanda 5y ago
  > 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 5y ago
    JetBrains is Czech
    - Koshkin 5y ago
      To elaborate, quoting Forbes, JetBrains has some links back to Russia. Shafirov is Russian, as are its three cofounders: Sergey Dmitriev, Eugene Belyaev and Valentin Kipiatkov. Three of its six research and development centers are also based in Russia, alongside its bases in Germany, the Netherlands, the U.S. and the Czech Republic.
- TacticalCoder 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    And what evidence do you see that the GDP of Russia is going to grow faster than that of France?
pmorici 5y ago
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 5y ago
  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_ 5y ago
    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 5y ago
      > 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.
    - oilbagz 5y ago
      >First of all, I do not see any indication that Russia or Belarus tries to get closer to the EU, rather the opposite. Putin has stated multiple times that he intends to have better relations with the EU, and that the Commonwealth of Independent States needs to work towards that goal, so .. I'm guessing you're not paying attention to that, since it doesn't serve the narrative that Russia just wants to 'go it alone against the world'. https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/putin-says-russia-wants-better-ties-with-europe/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/putin-sa... No, it wouldn't be good for the USA, but it would be great for Europeans and Russians to see this happen some day. Russia would be a perfectly fine partner with the EU, and it seems to be orienting towards that goal in a future date - American agitprop notwithstanding.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
chinathrow 5y ago
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 5y ago
  Germany should cancel Nord Stream 2. Shot across the bow of Gazprom and Russia.
  - haram_masala 5y ago
    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 5y ago
      Maybe Russia can get it's shit in order?
  - mschuster91 5y ago
    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...
  - quonn 5y ago
    That would likely hurt Germany (by reducing options).
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - cheph 5y ago
      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/ https://neveragainrightnow.com/
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
cm2187 5y ago
By cancelling foreign flights to and from Moscow, I am not sure who Putin thinks he is hurting most.
- postsantum 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    «назло маме отморожу уши» or «импортозамещение»?
    - postsantum 5y ago
      Разбомбить Воронеж which means bomb out the city of Voronezh https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8C_%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B6 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B8...
      - WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
        If in doubt, надо бомбить Воронеж
  - mynegation 5y ago
    Out of curiosity - what is this phrase? "Ни себе, ни людям" - (lit: "Not for one self, not for the people"), "Собака на сене" ("Dog on the hay"), "Напугали ежа голой задницей" ("Scare the hedgehog with the bare butt") or is it something more specific to the situation?
    - popileviz 5y ago
      In the case of sanctions or other similar political action - "бомбить Воронеж" - "bombing Voronezh"
elvis70 5y ago
Mirror: https://archive.is/LFfCp https://archive.is/LFfCp
Glavnokoman 5y ago
"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 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    I was under impression that word is usually used in the sense of taking something back. Could be wrong though.
    - Glavnokoman 5y ago
      A! And apparently I was wrong. OK, my fault.
      - ncallaway 5y ago
        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 5y ago
      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.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
jacksonkmarley 5y ago
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.
- jiofih 5y ago
  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.
  - jacksonkmarley 5y ago
    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.
  - relativ575 5y ago
    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-the-unfriendly-countries-list/ https://estonianworld.com/security/russia-puts-estonia-on-th...
    - alisonkisk 5y ago
      He wants Easter Europe subservient and afraid, not "friendly".
- URSpider94 5y ago
  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.
- 5y ago
dontbenebby 5y ago
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 billion 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-unwto.org/content/r13521/fulltext.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20150112082549/http://www.e-unwt...
- deanCommie 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    >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-approves-new-route-air-france-flights-moscow-2021-05-29/ 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.
jdjgktntnrk 5y ago
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.
Rohpakle 5y ago
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.
vbezhenar 5y ago
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.
myko 5y ago
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.
- ridiculous_leke 5y ago
  Countries in the east, except Japan and South Korea will never do that.
- fsloth 5y ago
  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.
- amelius 5y ago
  If only there was a psychological test for world leaders like we have for astronauts.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
supergirl 5y ago
do people really not remember https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident 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 5y ago
  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 5y ago
  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 https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/fab-001
  - h_anna_h 5y ago
    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#Interception_of_EgyptAir_jet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achille_Lauro_hijacking#Interc...
h_anna_h 5y ago
This was just an (expected) reaction to the banning of Belarusian airlines by the EU. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27273752 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27273752
zxienin 5y ago
So, in a ‘who blinks first’ running next 1 year, who stands to lose most?

191 points by underscore_ku 5y ago

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.

_ph_ 5y ago
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 5y ago
  The weird part is this: "which didn't get clearance" not this part: "so they don't fly"
  - _ph_ 5y ago
    Well, it seems that Russia is trying to play games. I just don't see how Russia can benefit from those.
    - KMag 5y ago
      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 5y ago
  They were saying it was weird for Russia not to give clearance.
detritus 5y ago
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.
- Daishiman 5y ago
  > 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 5y ago
    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.
- pjc50 5y ago
  > 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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Nuclear_Fuels_Ltd
omarish 5y ago
Why is it unfair that middle eastern carriers are offering a better product at a lower price?
- DangitBobby 5y ago
  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 5y ago
  Price dumping paid by oil&gas profits --> bye bye competition --> monopoly (duopoly?)
- Glavnokoman 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    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 5y ago
      Last time they tried it caused massive protests and unrest in France, so the government had to scrap the nex taxes...
      - papertokyo 5y ago
        Isn't this what the 'yellow vest' protests were (initially) about?
    - 5y ago
jasode 5y ago
>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 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.
JPLeRouzic 5y ago
> 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 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    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 5y ago
  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.
baybal2 5y ago
> 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 5y ago
  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 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Berlin_Air_Corridor
WanderPanda 5y ago
> 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 5y ago
  JetBrains is Czech
  - Koshkin 5y ago
    To elaborate, quoting Forbes, JetBrains has some links back to Russia. Shafirov is Russian, as are its three cofounders: Sergey Dmitriev, Eugene Belyaev and Valentin Kipiatkov. Three of its six research and development centers are also based in Russia, alongside its bases in Germany, the Netherlands, the U.S. and the Czech Republic.
TacticalCoder 5y ago
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 5y ago
  And what evidence do you see that the GDP of Russia is going to grow faster than that of France?

pmorici 5y ago

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 5y ago
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_ 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    > 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.
  - oilbagz 5y ago
    >First of all, I do not see any indication that Russia or Belarus tries to get closer to the EU, rather the opposite. Putin has stated multiple times that he intends to have better relations with the EU, and that the Commonwealth of Independent States needs to work towards that goal, so .. I'm guessing you're not paying attention to that, since it doesn't serve the narrative that Russia just wants to 'go it alone against the world'. https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/putin-says-russia-wants-better-ties-with-europe/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/putin-sa... No, it wouldn't be good for the USA, but it would be great for Europeans and Russians to see this happen some day. Russia would be a perfectly fine partner with the EU, and it seems to be orienting towards that goal in a future date - American agitprop notwithstanding.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

chinathrow 5y ago

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 5y ago
Germany should cancel Nord Stream 2. Shot across the bow of Gazprom and Russia.
- haram_masala 5y ago
  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 5y ago
    Maybe Russia can get it's shit in order?
- mschuster91 5y ago
  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...
- quonn 5y ago
  That would likely hurt Germany (by reducing options).
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - cheph 5y ago
    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/ https://neveragainrightnow.com/

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

cm2187 5y ago

By cancelling foreign flights to and from Moscow, I am not sure who Putin thinks he is hurting most.

postsantum 5y ago
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 5y ago
  «назло маме отморожу уши» or «импортозамещение»?
  - postsantum 5y ago
    Разбомбить Воронеж which means bomb out the city of Voronezh https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8C_%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B6 https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B8...
    - WesolyKubeczek 5y ago
      If in doubt, надо бомбить Воронеж
- mynegation 5y ago
  Out of curiosity - what is this phrase? "Ни себе, ни людям" - (lit: "Not for one self, not for the people"), "Собака на сене" ("Dog on the hay"), "Напугали ежа голой задницей" ("Scare the hedgehog with the bare butt") or is it something more specific to the situation?
  - popileviz 5y ago
    In the case of sanctions or other similar political action - "бомбить Воронеж" - "bombing Voronezh"

elvis70 5y ago

Mirror: https://archive.is/LFfCp https://archive.is/LFfCp

Glavnokoman 5y ago

"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 5y ago
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 5y ago
  I was under impression that word is usually used in the sense of taking something back. Could be wrong though.
  - Glavnokoman 5y ago
    A! And apparently I was wrong. OK, my fault.
    - ncallaway 5y ago
      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 5y ago
    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.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

jacksonkmarley 5y ago

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.

jiofih 5y ago
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.
- jacksonkmarley 5y ago
  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.
- relativ575 5y ago
  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-the-unfriendly-countries-list/ https://estonianworld.com/security/russia-puts-estonia-on-th...
  - alisonkisk 5y ago
    He wants Easter Europe subservient and afraid, not "friendly".
URSpider94 5y ago
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.
5y ago

dontbenebby 5y ago

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 billion 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-unwto.org/content/r13521/fulltext.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20150112082549/http://www.e-unwt...

deanCommie 5y ago
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 5y ago
  >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-approves-new-route-air-france-flights-moscow-2021-05-29/ 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.

jdjgktntnrk 5y ago

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.

Rohpakle 5y ago

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.

vbezhenar 5y ago

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.

myko 5y ago

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.

ridiculous_leke 5y ago
Countries in the east, except Japan and South Korea will never do that.
fsloth 5y ago
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.
amelius 5y ago
If only there was a psychological test for world leaders like we have for astronauts.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

supergirl 5y ago

do people really not remember https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident 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 5y ago
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 5y ago
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 https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/fab-001
- h_anna_h 5y ago
  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#Interception_of_EgyptAir_jet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achille_Lauro_hijacking#Interc...

h_anna_h 5y ago

This was just an (expected) reaction to the banning of Belarusian airlines by the EU. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27273752 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27273752

zxienin 5y ago

So, in a ‘who blinks first’ running next 1 year, who stands to lose most?