Do We Allow Air India's Request? To Fly Over Saudi Arabia Regardless Of Their Destination
07 February 2018By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed
Air India's request to operate flights headed to the West to fly over Saudi
Arabia and have a layover in Israel has been fodder for "enemy" media. The
media accused Saudi Arabia of allowing the Indians to cross over to the old
"enemy" Israel. The concerned side, the Saudi General Authority of Civil
Aviation, denied the claims and said that it has not approved the decision.
Let us observe the situation with some pragmatism from the perspective of
international interests and relations. The truth is, there is no strong
motivation or political reasoning that would prevent all airlines from around
the world, except those from Israel, Qatar and Iran, to fly over Saudi Arabia.
The carriers of these countries should be barred from flying over the Kingdom
until the dispute with them is resolved. Preserving sovereignty rights
includes barring travel through an airspace or averting other forms of
potential security disputes that may result from allowing an airline to travel
over a country.
Our ties with the rest of the countries of the world are good and their civil
airlines should be allowed to fly over Saudi Arabia regardless of their
destination. If Indian trips were headed to Athens, New York or elsewhere and
wanted to stop at an Israeli airport, then why should we punish them with a
ban? Israel, not another airline, will meanwhile be forced to shoulder the
burden of the added two-hour flight time to take the convoluted route between
India and Israel should the airspace ban be imposed..
At any rate, the dispute with Israel is very clear. A country, such as Qatar,
which enjoys almost full ties with Israel, should not be dictating to us,
through its propaganda machine, how to manage our airspace or territorial
waters.
Arab countries have debated at length over the concept of boycott and their
concerned institutions have agreed to distinguish between a boycott that harms
Israel and a boycott that harms the Arabs. The old concept of a boycott is not
limited to besieging Israel. Those who spoke of it were of the Arab left and
they also partly advocated banning trade with the West. They had prevented us
from importing a majority of electronics, such as Apple and Xerox products.
The banned list was compiled by the boycott office in Damascus, which had
control over trade in the Gulf. Corruption was rife in those procedures
whereby negotiations in the past were limited to governments and institutions
that had often abused their power for their own interests. A major campaign
was recently successful in redefining the concepts of a boycott and refining
blacklists.
When assessing Air India's request, we should look at the issue as a whole.
The Israeli carrier will benefit from the situation and the boycott, even if
it will have to fly an additional 2,000 kilometers. No other international
airline is willing to go the extra distance. In addition, political work that
serves the Palestinians and their cause, loses its tools when it does not have
anything to compromise in the crisis. Amid the disputes, wars and enmities, a
certain logic always determines how relations and punishments should
transpire. Why shouldn't we therefore tackle each case separately instead of
allowing the dogmatic and spiteful sides manipulate us?
Abdulrahman Al-Rashed is the former general manager of Al-Arabiya
television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat, and the
leading Arabic weekly magazine Al-Majalla. He is also a senior columnist in
the daily newspapers Al-Madina and Al-Bilad.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments