Global aviation council finds Russia responsible for downing MH17 over Ukraine in 2014
MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) - The Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization on Tuesday found Russia responsible for shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine with the loss of 298 lives more than a decade ago, in a ruling that raises the prospect of victims' families being paid compensation.
Russia has rejected the findings.
A Dutch-led international investigation concluded in 2016 that the Amsterdam-to-Kuala Lumpur airliner was shot down on July 17, 2014, from Ukrainian territory held by separatist rebels using a Buk missile system delivered from Russia. Moscow denies any involvement in the MH17 tragedy.
The Netherlands and Australian governments brought the case against Moscow before the Montreal-based global aviation agency in 2022, and on Tuesday welcomed the verdict.
Council finds that Russia violated the Chicago Convention
The council found that Russia had violated the Convention on International Civil Aviation, known as the Chicago Convention, which requires that states "refrain from resorting to the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight."
It's the first time that the council, which represents 193 member states, has decided a dispute between governments.
Dutch Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp said that the council would consider the question of reparations within weeks.
"In that context, the Netherlands and Australia are requesting that the ICAO Council order the Russian Federation to enter into negotiations with the Netherlands and Australia, and that the Council facilitate this process," Veldkamp said in a statement.
"The latter is important in order to ensure that the negotiations are conducted in good faith and according to specific timelines, and that they will yield actual results," he added.
Dutch father Thomas Schansman, who lost his son in the disaster, said the ICAO decision makes it clear Russia was responsible for the tragedy and could lead to compensation, but that he and other relatives mostly want the country to acknowledge its culpability.
"Money cannot buy anything back," he told The Associated Press.
Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong urged the council to move swiftly to "determine remedies."
"We call on Russia to finally face up to its responsibility for its horrific act of violence and make reparations for its egregious conduct, as required under international law," Wong said in a statement.
Russia rejects the council's findings
Speaking to journalists Tuesday, the Kremlin rejected the investigation's results as "biased."
"Russia did not take part in the investigation of this incident and therefore we will not accept these biased conclusions," said Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov.
Australian National University international law expert Don Rothwell said that the council had yet to publish the reasons for its decisions.
"One of the consequences for this process will be that the council will probably make some recommendations that Russia pay what are called reparations, which is an international term for damages, as a result of its violation of international law," Rothwell said.
"So we have to wait and see exactly what the council finds on that particular point," Rothwell added.
__
By ROD McGUIRK Associated Press
Source: Courthouse News Service
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
an hour ago
- New Straits Times
Nato chief urges 400pct rise in alliance's air defence
LONDON: Nato head Mark Rutte on Monday urged a "quantum leap" in defence capabilities including a "400-per cent increase" in air and missile defence to shield the alliance against Russia. His comments came as he pushes for Nato members to commit to ramping up defence spending at a key summit of the western military alliance later this month. "We see in Ukraine how Russia delivers terror from above, so we will strengthen the shield that protects our skies," the Nato secretary general said in a speech to the Chatham House think-tank in London. To maintain credible deterrence and defence, Nato needs "a 400-per cent increase in air and missile defence", the former Dutch prime minister added. "The fact is, we need a quantum leap in our collective defence," he said. Rutte is urging Nato members to commit to 3.5 per cent of GDP on direct military spending by 2032, and an additional 1.5 per cent on broader security-related expenditure. The proposal is a compromise deal designed to satisfy US President Donald Trump, who has demanded that allies each spend five per cent of economic output on defence, up from a current commitment of two per cent. Rutte said he "expects" leaders to agree to the proposal at the summit of the 32-country alliance on June 24-25 in The Hague. "It will be a Nato-wide commitment and a defining moment for the alliance," he said in his speech. Russia condemned Rutte's comments before he took to the stage, denouncing Nato as "an instrument of aggression". Nato "is demonstrating itself as an instrument of aggression and confrontation", Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters in Moscow. Rutte's speech came after he met UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday, their second Downing Street talks since the Labour leader came into power in July 2024. Starmer's government this year pledged to increase defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027, but has not yet set a firm timeline for further hikes. On Monday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced Canada would hit two per cent this year. US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth said last week the allies were close to an agreement on the split five-per cent target. "That combination constitutes a real commitment, and we think every country can step up," he said on Thursday. Nato members have been scrambling to bolster their defence capabilities since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Trump's return to the White House in January, and question marks over his commitment to European security, has added urgency. "Danger will not disappear even when the war in Ukraine ends," Rutte said at Chatham House. "We must have more forces and capabilities to implement our defence plans in full." He added that Russia currently produces the same amount of ammunition in three months as "the whole of Nato produces in a year". "Our militaries also need thousands more armoured vehicles and tanks, millions more artillery shells," Rutte added. Britain announced plans last week to build up to 12 nuclear-powered attack submarines and six munitions factories to rearm the country in response to what it said were threats from Russia. Rutte also warned that China is "modernizing and expanding its military at breakneck speed". "Nato has to become a stronger, fairer and more lethal alliance," he added. And he warned that if countries cannot commit to 5.0 per cent for defence spending "you could still have the National Health Service, or in other countries, their health systems, the pension system, etc, but you better learn to speak Russian. I mean, that's the consequence". - AFP
The Star
2 hours ago
- The Star
Forlorn Gaza – the world's shame
ON June 4, exactly a month ahead of the country's independence day, the United States vetoed – for the fifth time – a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for 'an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza'. The draft resolution vetoed by the solitary US vote received 14 in favour. It also called for the 'immediate and unconditional lifting of all restrictions on the entry and distribution of humanitarian aid in Gaza, calling for safe and unhindered access for UN and humanitarian partners across the enclave'. In what appeared to be a move coordinated with the veto, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the US was sanctioning four judges of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for 'targeting'with arrest warrants Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Earlier, the US had sanctioned the ICJ prosecutor for the same 'crime'. These US actions came as the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Mirjana Spoljaric, described Gaza as 'worse than hell on earth'. In an interview with the BBC at the ICRC headquarters in Geneva, she said 'humanity is failing' as it watched the horrors of the Gaza war. Israel's policy, backed by its US-led Western allies and the acquiescence of the regional Arab governments, has always been aimed at the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, and its governing coalition leaders have been unequivocal in explicitly stating their military objectives. The systematic destruction of any and all infrastructure that supports human life is near complete, with water, power, homes, schools, universities, and even hospitals bombed to rubble. Of the number of functioning hospitals in Gaza, only two remain. The UN has called for the protection of these last two hospitals, particularly providing emergency services to the Strip, which is being bombed and hit by missiles daily, causing dozens of casualties, young and old. The UN also says the percentage of malnourished children is rising by the day. This malnourishment is due to the Israeli food blockade on Gaza. Israel has brushed aside all aid organisations' protestations to introduce its own 'food distribution' points, where dozens of starving Palestinians, including women, have been killed by Israeli tank-mounted machine gun fire. The Conservative member of the UK Parliament, Kit Malthouse, defied his party's pro-Israel policy to offer the most apt description of what is happening. Speaking in the Commons, he said Gaza has become 'an abattoir where starving people are lured out through combat zones to be shot at'. 'If the situation were reversed, we would now be mobilising the British armed forces as part of an international protection force,' Malthouse said, exposing Western hypocrisy and his own government's inaction. Adding another twist to the food crisis in Gaza is the Israeli Prime Minister's confirmation – after Israeli defence sources had earlier told local journalists that accusations made by the Opposition politician Avigdor Lieberman were correct – about the arming of a group that many believe comprises criminals. Lieberman, according to the BBC, told the state broadcaster that the Prime Minister had unilaterally approved the arming of the Abu Shabab clan and transferred weapons to it. 'The Israeli government is giving weapons to a group of criminals and felons, identified with the Islamic State group.' Sources in the know say the group is led by Yasser Abu Shabab, who was an IS commander, and is an Israeli intelligence asset. His band of about 300 men, according to the Israeli Occupation Forces, has been armed to 'protect food trucks' trickling into Gaza. But sources on the ground say the group is doing the opposite, commandeering the trucks and looting the vital food supplies for the malnourished, starving Palestinians. It is this one-sided ethnic-cleansing, being facilitated by the US and its envoy Steve Witkoff, that may be impacting public opinion in Europe at least. Public opinion is shifting, which is also reflected in the robust questioning of the Israeli Hasbara spin doctors in the media. These advocates for the Israeli cause are outraged even by some basic questions a few journalists are beginning to ask because they have had a free pass to spin their lies since October 2023. European government leaders are beginning to express unease – only in words and not deeds, though – in calling the Gaza situation intolerable and unacceptable but stopping well short of any concrete measures such as an arms embargo. This rhetoric too is driven by the changing public mood reflected in a recent YouGov poll across Europe. The poll showed Israel as being viewed most unfavourably since they started polling on this issue in 2016. And Israel's actions in Gaza are seen as disproportionate and unjustified. Even then, US President Donald Trump is likely to be convinced his Gaza Riviera plan is on course and in the end the Palestinians will be displaced. With few friends in the Arab world, whose leaders generously opened up their cheque books for the US president and applied little, if any, pressure to secure an end to the genocide, the Palestinians seem to be on their own. The (resource-starved) government of the ummah's most potent military power may have co-sponsored the vetoed UN resolution, but its powerful elite queued up at the embassy gate for hours to be able to have the honour of celebrating US Independence Day inexplicably on June 4, a month earlier than July 4. The ethnic cleansing in Gaza and, don't forget, the West Bank will continue. The collective conscience of the people around the globe will not be able to stop it on its own. This is the world we inhabit. — Dawn/Asia News Network Abbas Nasir is a former editor of Dawn.
Focus Malaysia
2 hours ago
- Focus Malaysia
Rethinking SEATO: A new maritime pact for ASEAN?
AS geopolitical tensions escalate in the Indo-Pacific, Southeast Asian nations find themselves increasingly vulnerable to the turbulence sweeping the region. China's growing assertiveness in the South China Sea, the rising strategic competition between the United States (US) and China, and the proliferation of non-traditional maritime threats such as piracy and illegal fishing have converged to create a volatile security environment. Against this backdrop, a provocative question has resurfaced: Should the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) revive the Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO) as a mechanism to bolster regional maritime security? SEATO, founded in 1954 and dissolved in 1977, was originally designed as a Cold War-era collective defence pact aimed at containing communism. Its legacy is, at best, mixed. With only two Southeast Asian members i.e., Thailand and the Philippines and heavily dominated by external powers like the US, United Kingdom, and France, SEATO was often criticised for its lack of cohesion and legitimacy within the region. Its failure to evolve into a true collective security mechanism contributed to its irrelevance and eventual dissolution. Yet in 2025, the strategic landscape has changed dramatically. Today, the Indo-Pacific is the epicentre of global power politics, and ASEAN's role has never been more crucial. The organisation stands at a crossroads: continue with its consensus-based, non-aligned approach, or adapt to a more assertive and structured security framework in response to rising threats. The idea of reviving SEATO or at least, reimagining it should be explored seriously, but with critical adjustments grounded in current realities. Maritime security: ASEAN's Achilles heel Southeast Asia's maritime domain is a focal point for multiple overlapping claims, economic interests, and military ambitions. The South China Sea alone sees one-third of global shipping pass through its waters. Yet, maritime security remains ASEAN's Achilles heel. Despite initiatives like the ASEAN Maritime Forum and joint patrols in the Sulu and Celebes Seas, the region lacks a comprehensive, cohesive maritime defence structure. In the face of China's continued island-building, coercion of fishermen, and incursions into Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs), ASEAN's diplomatic toolbox seems increasingly inadequate. Reviving SEATO or creating a SEATO 2.0 could offer a more robust framework to pool resources, share intelligence, and establish clear deterrents. Unlike its Cold War predecessor, a modern version would need to be rooted in ASEAN leadership, rather than being externally driven. This could transform it from a symbol of neo-colonial entanglement into a proactive regional safeguard. A reimagined SEATO: ASEAN-led and inclusive Any modern iteration of SEATO must be fundamentally different in design and intent. First and foremost, it should be ASEAN-led, preserving the centrality of the organisation. External partners such as the US, Japan, Australia, and India could serve as dialogue or strategic partners, but not dominant actors. This would maintain ASEAN's long-held position of neutrality while enabling it to take a more assertive role in shaping regional security. The objectives of a new SEATO would also need to evolve. Rather than being a purely anti-China alliance, it should focus on enhancing maritime domain awareness, building naval interoperability, strengthening coast guard cooperation, and securing sea lines of communication. These goals are inherently defensive and could gain broader support among ASEAN's diverse members, many of whom are wary of becoming pawns in great power rivalries. This reimagined SEATO could also be integrated into the broader Indo-Pacific security architecture. Coordination with initiatives like the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), the Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness (IPMDA), and the Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia (ReCAAP) would create a multi-layered and resilient defence posture. Challenges and caveats However, reviving or rebranding SEATO is far from a silver bullet. ASEAN's core principles are non-interference, consensus-based decision-making, and respect for sovereignty, often inhibit swift or unified responses to crises. Member states have varying security priorities and relationships with major powers. For instance, Cambodia and Laos maintain close ties with China, while the Philippines and Vietnam are more confrontational. This divergence makes the formation of a formal security pact challenging. Moreover, introducing a SEATO-like structure risks undermining ASEAN unity if not managed carefully. It could exacerbate intra-regional tensions and provoke backlash from China, which may interpret it as an encirclement strategy. Balancing deterrence and diplomacy will be crucial. The path forward: Pragmatic regionalism Rather than a wholesale revival of SEATO, ASEAN should consider a flexible, modular approach. A 'SEATO-lite' framework beginning with joint maritime exercises, intelligence sharing, and capacity-building—could evolve organically based on the needs and consensus of member states. This incremental strategy would avoid the political costs of formalising a defence pact while still enhancing maritime cooperation. Additionally, ASEAN should push for institutional reforms that allow for 'ASEAN Minus X' models where willing members move forward on specific security initiatives without requiring unanimity. This would preserve the group's cohesion while allowing progress on urgent maritime issues. Conclusion The notion of reviving SEATO as a means to strengthen maritime security in Southeast Asia is both provocative and timely. While the historical baggage of the original SEATO looms large, the current strategic environment demands fresh thinking. A reinvented, ASEAN-led security framework whether called SEATO or something new could be a pivotal step in safeguarding the region's maritime future. ASEAN must not allow itself to be paralysed by its past or by external pressures. The Indo-Pacific is evolving rapidly, and so too must Southeast Asia's security architecture. Whether through a revived SEATO or an entirely new model, one thing is clear: the time for passive neutrality is over. ‒ June 9, 2025 R Paneir Selvam is the principal consultant of Arunachala Research & Consultancy Sdn Bhd, a think tank specialising in strategic national and geopolitical matters. The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia. Main image: AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit
