.png)
Date: 11/09/2024
Where: Afghanistan
Who’s involved: Taliban, International airlines, other aircraft operators
What happened?
Since the taking of power by the Taliban in Afghanistan, most aviation operators have been avoiding the airspace over the country (except airway P/G500). Recently, some countries such as Canada and the Netherlands are starting to overfly the country with a minimum altitude restriction in place of FL320. This routing can save a significant amount of time when flying between Europe and Asia, compared to alternatives.
Analysis:
As far as it is known, the Taliban and other militant groups in Afghanistan do not have the capability, and to some extent the intent, to target overflying aircraft at cruise altitudes. Airlines and other operators, however, must consider the consequences if problems on board challenge the ability or choice to stay at cruising altitude. When entering the airspace below FL320, an aircraft will quickly descend into the range of anti-air weapons present in the country. The shoulder fired anti-air missiles (MANPADS) in the country are largely able to reach FL150, due to range augmentation by the high altitude of much of the country’s territory. ‘Perfect’ circumstances will allow for ranges reaching FL200 over the majority of the central part of the country.
Mechanical issues: Obvious reasons for aircraft to descend, or commit to a full emergency landing stem from mechanical issues. For example, a loss of cabin pressure will force an aircraft to descend well within the range of MANPADS as explained above. Other issues that can force an aircraft to land will make a flight very likely land in Afghanistan considering the size of the country. This presents the challenge of not just getting pax and crew out, but also eventually the aircraft itself.
Medical issues: An easily overlooked perspective is if medical problems occur with either crew or pax on board of an aircraft over Afghanistan. Deciding to land in Afghanistan does not only bring an aircraft in range of the many weapons in the country, but it also does not guarantee the necessary medical care and services to those who need it. This would also mean the aircraft and all of its crew and pax are now on ground in Taliban-led Afghanistan. The alternative –not landing– can also be a difficult decision that falls on the pilot(s). In, for example, the scenario where one of the pilots becomes incapacitated, the colleague(s) sitting next to them is/are now in charge of the difficult decision to attempt to find rescue in the country or to continue flying, possibly sealing the fate of the colleague. Similarly, there is also the cabin crew and all of the pax who can have medical issues.
Conclusion:
While operating over Afghanistan under normal circumstances is secure, the situation can quickly escalate as soon as anything out of the ordinary happens during the flight. Consequences of both mechanical and medical events should be strongly considered when deciding to operate over Afghanistan. Besides the presented security issues in this document, safety and ethical issues exist about operating over the country. The country has no ATC and the money paid to gain overflight rights goes to the Taliban, which is a terrorist organization that severely restricts freedoms and violates the rights of its citizens, especially women.