Source: Ebrahim Noroozi for AP
Just after 6am on Wednesday January 7th, Ukrainian International Airlines flight PS752 crashed shortly after takeoff from Iran. All 176 passengers aboard the aircraft, a Boeing 737-800 bound for Ukraine, were killed on impact. Ukraine and Iran both rushed to rule out terrorism as a cause, but Ukraine later retracted the statement, saying it was too early to make a call. Normally, plane crashes are not political events, but this one may very well turn out to be one as it involves an American company and the Iranian government at a time when tensions between the two countries are near the tipping point. For one, the head of Iran's Civil Aviation Agency has vowed not to hand over the black boxes to Boeing, which would deprive them of possibly crucial information.
Update: As this is an ongoing story, new speculations/developments have popped up since I first posted it. The New York Times has now published a video which appears to show the plane being shot down by an anti-aircraft missile. Iran is investigating the black boxes at this time, but refuses to admit any involvement of missiles.
Update: As this is an ongoing story, new speculations/developments have popped up since I first posted it. The New York Times has now published a video which appears to show the plane being shot down by an anti-aircraft missile. Iran is investigating the black boxes at this time, but refuses to admit any involvement of missiles.
Questions:
1. This event comes right after the assassination of Iran's top general, Qassem Soleimani, and Iran's retaliatory strikes, as Ryan posted about. What complications do you think American-Iranian tensions will bring to the investigation of the crash, if any? If missiles are actually involved, what consequences do you think will result?
2. Our Congresswoman, Jackie Speier, has called this unfortunate event "collateral damage" from the Soleimani killing, placing some blame on the Trump administration. Do you agree with that statement? Why or why not?
2. As you may know, Boeing has taken a big hit from the grounding of its 737-800 MAX model due to the tragic crashes of Lion Air 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in the past two years. I know we won't be starting economics for a few weeks, but what effect do you think this will have on Boeing's performance in the short-term, especially in light of the 737-800 MAX's recent tragedies? How about in the long-term? This question is obsolete as it now appears Boeing has nothing to do with this tragedy.
1. This event comes right after the assassination of Iran's top general, Qassem Soleimani, and Iran's retaliatory strikes, as Ryan posted about. What complications do you think American-Iranian tensions will bring to the investigation of the crash, if any? If missiles are actually involved, what consequences do you think will result?
2. Our Congresswoman, Jackie Speier, has called this unfortunate event "collateral damage" from the Soleimani killing, placing some blame on the Trump administration. Do you agree with that statement? Why or why not?
In response to the second question, considering Boeing's history of tragic accidents within just the last two years, I believe this event (no matter if it was Boeing's fault or not) will definitely harm the company economically because airlines will be less likely to use Boeing planes as a result of the public's perception of the company. In the long-term, Boeing may be able to rebuild their reputation as a reliable plane manufacturer and earn back the trust of the public but only time will tell.
ReplyDeleteI think that the current tensions between America and Iran will be further escalated in light of this plane crash, since it was determined that a missile brought the plane down. This conflict can create huge biases during this investigation, and can lead to misinformation on both sides, which especially dangerous at this time. This involvement of missiles could lead trigger-happy Trump to behave rashly and take reckless action. I agree with Nathan, this event will certainly damage Boeing's reputation, and increase the public's fear regarding flying and terrorism.
ReplyDeleteSeeing as the popular consensus now is that missiles are involved, what may actually be more interesting than observing US-Iran relations would be observing Canada-Iran relations, seeing as about half the people on board were Canadian nationals. At this point, without any further developments, I don't think relations between the US and Iran will escalate negatively significantly; even if new sanctions are implemented, neither party has an incentive to start World War III. This also isn't great news for Boeing, but if the missile theory is solidified in credence, they aren't to blame (this time) for the crash.
ReplyDeleteIt will be interesting to go back to this in a week or two, assuming that we haven't all found a new issue to latch on to.
Update #2: Iran has surprisingly admitted to accidentally shooting down the plane.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this incident could definitely worsen the already tense relations between Iran and America. Even though it has been stated that the missile firing was an accident, I am sure that countries will continue to view the attack as reckless and even intentional. Trump could use this tragedy as an opportunity to attack Iran even further, but that remains to be seen.
ReplyDeleteI think it's a good sign that Iran has admitted to this tragedy as many predicted the government would never fold on this issue since the US's downing of Iran Flight 655 in 1988 has been a national source of anti-US anger for ages and admitting to this would be admitting to being even. And this is sad to say, but I think the only reason they owned up to this event is because the crash had so many Iranian victims that Iran could not hide the facts from its own people this time. Though I have no trust in Trump to refrain from immoral exploitation of this tragedy to frame Iran as weak or incompetent, I'm hopeful that he will take into account the deadly missile capabilities we have seen on display with Iranian attacks on US bases thus far and deescalate tensions. Miraculously, there have been no US casualties thus far, and I hope casualties on both sides remain low.
DeleteAddressing Jackie Speier’s statement, the Trump administration likely has some responsible for the accident. It was the Trump administration's decision to assassinate Soleimani that led to the anti-aircraft missile being launched by accident. While the current administration is not wholly to blame for this, and it is entirely possible that the plane crash is not related to this, the environment in Iran caused by this could have caused stressed that lead to this accident. Ultimately, we will never know how much Soleimani’s assassination influenced this event, but depending on the degree, the Trump administration will hold that same degree of responsibility for this tragedy.
ReplyDeleteI believe that this will exacerbate Iranian-American relations, as it is a serious blunder to "accidentally" shoot down aircraft carrying civilians, especially if they don't agree to hand over the black boxes. I don't believe it will have a hugely massive effect on international relations, it mostly just makes Iran look incompetent and place responsibility on them for a terrible tragedy, tainting their international reputation. This could especially be seen through a Canadian perspective, as the majority of passengers were Canadian citizens. How Iran mistook the civilian aircraft as a military threat seems unfathomable to me, but hopefully their administration can correct whatever caused the mistake and enact justice for the passengers by issuing out some sort of reparations or penalty for those involved. I believe that Trump may have had some influence, as he is constantly proclaiming empty threats to nations like Iran through tweets and choosing belligerent officials for high offices like national security advisers. However, now that he has fully acted on one of those threats by assassinating Soleimani, officials in Iran probably feel perturbed and apprehensive, seeing the possibility of threat more likely than before.
ReplyDelete