Last year in August I had the distinct "pleasure" of flying to Tehran on board of an Iran Air Boeing 747. In light of the fact that Iran's air industry has had two plane crashes and two more in-flight emergencies in just the past 3 weeks, it is important for Americans to understand that US sanctions are partly the cause of these disasters--and that they can be prevented.
I arranged my trip last year so I could attend my cousin's wedding. As a dual Iranian-Canadian citizen, I am able to travel to Iran with relative ease, and despite common stereotypes, travel to Iran is perfectly safe--that is, except if you are traveling with Iranian airlines.
Needless to say after the trip I swore never to fly with Iran Air again.
This is not because of stale peanuts or bad airplane food. On the contrary, the "chelo kabab" was the only aspect of the flight that I actually enjoyed. Rather, it was because of the horrifying conditions of the three decade old planes that are standard for Iran's air travel industry.
My aircraft was one of the first generation Boeing 747 series that the Shah purchased from the United States before the 1979 revolution. Upon sitting, the first thing I noticed was the ashtrays that were still functional in the armrests of the chairs, even though smoking is not allowed on board. Evidently, these aircrafts have not been upgraded for quite some time.
My seat was positioned just behind the wing, and as a beautiful London sunset was bouncing off the engines I noticed the rust around the rivets holding the wings on to the aircraft. "Great," I thought; "that's what I wanted to see right before takeoff."
As the passengers were boarding the plane a family of three took their seats about five rows from where I was sitting. From what I could see, the son of this family was suffering from Down's syndrome and was in a wheelchair. Unfortunately, this particular Boeing 747 was not wheelchair accessible.
Here the "helpful" flight attendants suggested to the parents that they either take the next flight or "sit at the very front of the aisle and hold on to the wheelchair to keep it from rolling." The parents were irate, and demanded to speak to the pilot, who also told them to take the other flight and kindly leave his aircraft.
After the family exited, the flight finally took off. Only then did the pilot announce over the intercom that, due to the plane's instability, we would be unable to fly at the normal cruising altitude of 35,000 feet. Instead, we would be flying lower and slower, prolonging my mid-air nightmare by another two hours. One of the passengers sitting near me asked the flight attendant the reason for the additional delay. Her answer was less than reassuring: "The airframe and the wings of the aircraft can no longer sustain themselves in high altitudes so we have to fly lower."
My return trip wasn't any better. On the way back to Canada, my flight was delayed for three hours because the aftermarket hydraulic pipe (probably purchased secondhand from the Chinese) of our Iran Air 747 was leaking fluid and had to be repaired.
So can we chalk this up to an inferior "third world" aviation industry that can't afford basic maintenance? Or is it possible that our efforts to squeeze the Iranian government have had the unintended effect of choking off vital parts and services necessary for keeping passenger planes from falling out of the sky?
As an indirect consequence of the US embargo on trade with Iran, Iranian Airlines have been prohibited from updating their 30 year-old American aircrafts. Additionally, U.S. sanctions even make it difficult for Iranian airliners to get European spare parts for their fleet of Airbus planes, hence the sanctions prevent upkeep of these aircrafts as well. This has forced the Iranian civilian aircraft industry to rely on poor Russian substitutes, many of which are from the Soviet era and for which it is difficult to find spare parts.
Two particular aircraft commonly in use in Iran are the Tupolev Tu-154 also known among Iranians as "flying coffins" and the Ilyushins 76, the Soviet-era workhorses for Russian civil air fleets. The Tu-154 was produced by the Soviet Union in the early 1960s until their production was halted due to their poor flight history. After the Soviet collapse, government funding sharply declined for manufacturers of aircraft and spare parts, hence other countries such as Iran who are using their planes have had a harder time obtaining parts and have had to resort to cannibalizing planes from their own fleet.
The difficulty in obtaining spare parts and service has taken its toll on the safety of Iran's civilian fleet. The wear and tear from operating the same planes for decades began to show in 2002 when two Tu-154 planes crashed, killing 128. In 2003, a Russian-made Ilyushins 76 that was carrying elite members of the revolutionary guard crashed and left 302 dead. In 2005 a US-made C-130 which was purchased before the 1979 revolution crashed and caused the deaths of 115 passengers. And finally, in the past three weeks alone, two Tu-154s crashed, a Boeing 707 had two engines catch fire mid-flight, and another passenger plane's landing gear malfunctioned after takeoff. In all, at least 185 passengers have died in the past three weeks alone.
A spokesperson for Boeing indicated to me that the poor safety record of Iranian aircraft is a serious concern for them. "This is really a safety of flight issue," the spokeswoman said. "We care about the safe operation of our fleet of aircrafts worldwide, regardless of the country."
Current law prohibits the export to Iran of aircraft parts without a specific license from the US Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), though obtaining a license is a daunting task. According to Boeing's spokesperson, the application process often takes place with a "presumption of denial."
There is a popular joke in Iran that says Iranian pilots always say their prayers on the intercom before taking off. For years now, the safety of Iran's civilian planes and the lives of hundreds of their passengers have rested on a wing and a prayer. How many more people will have to die before lawmakers realize that our broad sanctions on Iran -- which have little or no impact on the government's behavior -- are unnecessarily killing innocent people? Can't we figure out a way to put pressure on the government but spare the men, women, and children of Iran just trying to travel from one place to another? I would like to think that we can, but until politicians in Washington take a closer look at the unintended consequences of our Iran policy, it is the people of Iran who will suffer the most.
I look forward to the day when responsible and caring people are in charge in Iran and a large order for spanking new Boeing passenger jets can be placed to not only help Iran and her people, but the U.S. economy as well.
In the meantime, sensible Iranians ought to invest heavily in domestic aircraft industries.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/industry-aviation.htm
Perhaps the author of this article should write a letter to SUPREME leader of Iran (i.e. owner) and ask him to spend some of the money which comes up short from the treasury (i.e. stolen by clergy) to buy spare parts or at least buy newer "pre-owned" aircraft.
Oh, what, can't get the parts needed to make them safe again? Here's another idea - the regime stops pi$$ing off the countries suppling parts and the aircraft that are wanted.
The modern world we live in is tightly integrated and interdependant. If Iran wants to participate in the world community, then they need to stop behaving anti-socially to that community. That is, the Iranian regime, as we all know the Iranian people want nothing more that to be responsible participants in the world community, if only their government would let them. All through human history, the punishment for anti-social behavior has been banishment from the tribe, clan, town. etc. - the point being if you can't function within a society, you do not get to have the benefits of that society. This is the same principle of bans and sanctions - if a government can't cooperate with the world community, they do not get access to the benefits of being a part of the world community. And that includes parts to keep your airplanes flying.
"All through human history, the punishment for anti-social behavior has been banishment from the tribe, clan, town". The exception being, of course, that if you own the biggest stick (or biggest collection of big sticks) you and your friends get to be as anti-social as you like (you might have your PR people spin it as "humanitarian" anti-social activity), to make up the rules as you go along, to apply them selectively and to ignore them whenever you feel like it.
They are intended to make life a bitch in Iran and possibly their foolish leaders will wake up one of these days. The Iranian leadership is what is causing hardship on its' people - if they would get on board and drop their nuclear ambitions, life for all their people wil improve.
They are doing it to themselves.
Your story is clearly turned around - I suggest changing your point of view.
Second, sanctions "intended to make life a bitch" for the innocent civilians of a country are ethically indefensible. Yes, sanctions targeted to governments do affect the people as well, but you're suggesting that it's ok to actually target the people directly, which is a uniquely barbaric notion.
Third, such sanctions are ineffective (even if they were ethical). Did such sanctions do anything for Iraqis, North Koreans, Cubans, and so on?
Charges of passports France gave Iraqi before the invasion, anything to demean Iraq in support of pre-emptive murder to follow.