This situation is getting kind of messy. Airlines are stuck between a rock and a hard place, as tensions between the United States and Venezuela escalate…
In this post:
Venezuela bans airlines that pull service due to US warning
Recently, the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a NOTAM (Notice to Airmen), warning of a “potentially hazardous situation” when flying over Venezuela. Per the warning:
OPERATORS ARE ADVISED TO EXERCISE CAUTION WHEN OPERATING IN THE MAIQUETIA FLIGHT INFORMATION REGION AT ALL ALTITUDES DUE TO THE WORSENING SECURITY SITUATION AND HEIGHTENED MILITARY ACTIVITY IN OR AROUND VENEZUELA. THREATS COULD POSE A POTENTIAL RISK TO AIRCRAFT AT ALL ALTITUDES, INCLUDING DURING OVERFLIGHT, THE ARRIVAL AND DEPARTURE PHASES OF FLIGHT, AND/OR AIRPORTS AND AIRCRAFT ON THE GROUND.
While no airlines from the United States fly to Venezuela, several foreign airlines decided to suspend flights to Venezuela, following the warning by the US. This includes carriers like Avianca, GOL, Iberia, LATAM, TAP Air Portugal, and Turkish Airlines.
Venezuela is furious that some airlines made this decision, arguing that the FAA has no jurisdiction over its airspace, and it has accused the carriers of “joining the actions of state terrorism promoted by the United States government” by “unilaterally suspending air commercial operations.”
Venezuela has claimed that any airline that doesn’t resume service to the country within 48 hours will have its operational permits revoked, meaning the airlines won’t be allowed to fly to the country in the future.
As you’d expect, officials from other governments are angry about Venezuela’s decision, arguing that revoking operating rights for airlines is a “totally disproportionate” response. Obviously these airlines don’t intend to cancel service to Venezuela in the long run, but instead, these are just temporary suspensions, while they figure out what’s going on.
All of this comes as tensions between the United States and Venezuela keep rising. The US made made its largest military deployment to the Caribbean in decades, as Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro has been accused of supplying drugs that have killed Americans. Maduro has of course denied this, and has accused Trump of trying to oust him.
Is Venezuela overplaying its hand with airlines?
It goes without saying that Venezuela’s government is taking extreme measures in responding to the FAA’s advisory.
Now, we don’t fully know what information the United States government has that prompted this warning. But either way, I think most “responsible” foreign carriers would take some caution with such a warning, and perhaps limit flights. After all, if the United States is warning of a risk to aircraft at all altitudes, and of potential military activity, that should be cause for concern.
But of course Venezuela isn’t happy about that. That being said, I think the country is greatly overplaying its hand here. If airlines aren’t comfortable flying to a country, then they’re definitely not going to be comfortable resuming service under the premise of “fly here within the next 48 hours, or else.”
I have to imagine that Venezuela will eventually back down from taking this approach. After all, good air connectivity is important for countries. Then again, if the goal is to become more isolated, then perhaps that’s not the case.
Bottom line
Tensions between the United States and Venezuela are escalating. The United States warned airlines of the risk of using Venezuelan airspace. As a result, several airlines decided to pull service to the country.
That’s something that the Venezuelan government takes issue with, and they’ve responded by accusing these airlines of supporting US “state terrorism,” and threatening to ban them if they don’t immediately resume flights. I suspect that Venezuela is overplaying its hand here, but it’ll be interesting to see how this all plays out.
What do you make of Venezuela’s threats against airlines?
If you have time, read today's Wall Street Journal story on drug smuggling via water from Columbia and Venezuela. There's an interview with a Columbian crewman on some of these runs. It struck me how matter of fact the crewman was. It's just about the money ($10,000 per trip for his role and up to $100,000 for the boat's pilot), and the potential of a fatal airstrike is an acceptable risk of the job. I...
If you have time, read today's Wall Street Journal story on drug smuggling via water from Columbia and Venezuela. There's an interview with a Columbian crewman on some of these runs. It struck me how matter of fact the crewman was. It's just about the money ($10,000 per trip for his role and up to $100,000 for the boat's pilot), and the potential of a fatal airstrike is an acceptable risk of the job. I wonder if he believes the great majority of trips will make the run safely, he and his family are despirate for cash, or he just doesn't value his life.
Orange man bad. All those videos showing poor fishing boat being blown up. We can all see they are transporting square groupers. Square groupers are the most popular fish imported from south America.
I mean, the NOTAM is clearly politically motivated and has nothing to do with the situation on the ground. I suppose it's more about possible issues with insurance rather than airlines actually being worried about safety.
I suspect their insurance companies didn't like the idea of their insured being in a war zone.
Just look at how many times airspace over Iran and Iraq cleared out before Iran's nuclear ambitions were set back.
Now to get Ukrainian airspace reopened to the world....
“as Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro has been accused of supplying drugs that have killed Americans” - Accused by whom? A person who lies about everything and everyone.
As much as I love Latin America and as much as I would love to go to Venezuela one day, who on their right mind wants to fly there right now?
GR asks who wants to fly there right now?
I suspect that perhaps the Pilots of the B-21 Raider and B-52 Fleet?
Yeah. Because warmongering (of course, on the poor) is heroic and super productive.
People who live there? People who do business there? People who have family ties there?
Why do people always keep posting this crap whenever flights to some high-risk destination are mentioned. Not everyone who flies is on a holiday. There's a myriad of essential reasons to travel even to worst parts of the world, which is why airlines fly to such places.
The winners here will be PTY and all of the major airports in Colombia. I think all six of those airlines currently fly to PTY, so don't be surprised to see increased frequencies.
Hot take: The six should issue a joint press release...
"...and nothing if value was lost..."
(They might also seriously consider banning Venezuelan officials from flying on them and tell the EU that they'll just pay fines for refusing carriage of Venezuelan diplomats rather than carrying them.)
Is it me?
Gary, whatever are you trying to say? Please explain.
One never likes to see raised tensions between countries, especially two countries who could easily be provoked into starting something nasty. One hopes that common sense will prevail and this spat will blow over.