This piece is cross-posted at the Adventure Quest travel blogThe question was raised on a travel blog earlier this week about the necessity for small countries to operate airlines of their own. The question of justification came to the fore when looking at Surinam Airways, an unlikely country to have an airline, and whether or not a country with a gross domestic product of $2.4b should have (or needs) an airline of its own.
For nations large and small, rich and poor, civil aviation has been a vital tool to connect citizens with the world on its own terms.
"International aviation is thus not just another problem in a changing economic system, though it is that; international civil aviation is a serious problem in international relations, affecting the way governments view one another, the way individual citizens view their own foreign countries, and in a variety of direct and indirect connections and the security arrangements by which we live." - Andreas LowenfeldThat quote, from a 1975 article in Foreign Affairs Magazine, inspired my senior thesis in College. The title was Aviation as Ambassador, not coincidentally the same name of the first post on FlightBlogger in 2007.
The historical Western global leadership in civil aviation in the first half of the last century has served as an example to all nations as a symbol of modernization and progress.
Civil aircraft (in both their development and operation) are symbols of power and prestige for nations. We need only look to the Boeing 747 and Airbus A380 to see the impact these aircraft have had on the identity of the nations that operate them.
For the United States, the same year Charles Lindbergh flew non-stop from New York to Paris in 1927 (contrary to popular belief he was not the first to cross the Atlantic) Pan American Airways came into being as an airmail service between the Florida Keys and Havana, Cuba. With the relative protection of the US Government, which saw Pan Am as the "chosen instrument" for US travel abroad, the airline quickly became America's flag carrier. Later on in the century, Pan Am would become Boeing's launch customer for the 747.
The idea of a flag carrier in the US is somewhat outmoded though. Pan Am folded in 1991 and TWA in 2001 (merging with American Airlines). Today, we have Delta/Northwest, United, Continental, American and US Airways - so the idea of one airline representing the US abroad is foreign to Americans.
In the case of the US today, international air travel is a representation of the free market forces that enable such competition, multiple airlines competing with one another vying for the attention of the consumer. In the absence of one flag carrier, we find the identity of the United States. Though protectionist tendencies still abound with restrictions on foreign ownership and cabotage.
These same political motivations created (and protected) the airlines of the world's largest economies; Pan Am (defunct), Lufthansa, British Airways, Air France and others are also found in smaller countries like Surinam.
For airlines like Surinam Airways, which operates a fleet of two aircraft, connecting its citizens to the world is an important representation of self-determination and modernization; profitability and operational effectiveness often falls by the wayside.
There are two sides to this coin. A national airline can carry both a positive and negative message about a country. As an extension of national identity, airlines can become a liability in the event of an accident. Accident prone airlines like Garuda and other Indonesian carriers have found themselves blacklisted by the EU, unable to serve Europe causing significant damage to the economic health of the nation.
Surinam Airways was founded in 1955 and became the national carrier when Surinam gained independence from the Netherlands in 1975. Today, the airline operates one Boeing 747-300 and McDonnell Douglas MD-82, both built in 1986 for long haul and regional routes respectively serving seven destinations in Europe, North America, the Carribean and South America.
The airline is as much a tool of economic development and tourism as much as it is a diplomatic symbol of Surinam touching down in countries around the world.
For the nations that don't hold significant economic sway, aviation is ambassador.
Photo credit: Pascalg_1991/Creative Commons License
on October 31, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply
"Along with a flag and an anthem, the symbols of nationhood all too often include a money-losing national airline. Since 1950, the number of "flag" carriers has proliferated to the point that there are almost as many as there are countries in the U.N. At least one airline is sensibly going against the trend. Tiny Austrian Airlines, which is distinguished by excellent service and frequent deficits, is seeking a shelter under the broad wings of Swissair."
From Time magazine, 12 October 1970 (see http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,942362,00.html )
If anyone knows an earlier origin for the first sentence quoted above I would be fascinated to know. There is much that one could write on this subject.
on October 31, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply
About Surinam Airways : I think it is wise to realize that when Surinam became independent from the Netherlands in 1975, more then half the population moved to the Netherlands. That gives a feeling of how strong the connections are between those countries. Surinams high density 747 isn't big enough. KLM operates a 747 AMS-PAR too.
Surinams ex KLM 747 is fully supported / maintained by KLM and only flown Parimaribo Amsterdam - Parimaribo..
on November 2, 2008 10:00 AM | Reply
Having a national flag carrier shall not be confused with the need for good airline connections. When Swissair went in trouble, the Swiss Confederation injected enormous amounts of money in that, to save jobs, and "ensure good connections" to the rest of the world.
I personally have no doubts that any other european company would have been more than happy to re-use the lines that Swissair / Swiss would have left. This has been perfectly demonstrated now that Swiss has been bought by Lufthansa.
So yes to good connection to "small" countries, but this does not always justify the need for a national airline.
on November 2, 2008 6:11 PM | Reply
Great post Jon. Airlines are certainly ambassadors of nations, especially the smaller ones. Who hasn't heard of the US? But airlines like Air Tahiti Nui (Tahiti), Royal Brunei Airlines (Brunei) and Druk Air (Bhutan) are often the only way people around the world get to learn about the countries.
Another important factor is being a cultural ambassador. Airlines representing small nations often offer very culturally unique products and
services too. Eg, every Royal Brunei Airlines flight begins with a traditional prayer, and flight attendants wear a variation of the traditional "tudung" (head-scarf).
Moreover, even though many of them may not be profitable, they offer personal care and service that sometimes cannot be duplicated by larger carriers - just because of the scale. Again,
having flown Royal Brunei to Dubai before, I can say that service and IFE came close to that of Singapore Airlines. But as you mentioned, I'm not sure how long they'll be able to survive without making profits.
on November 3, 2008 6:15 AM | Reply
"You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airliner - it helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons, but at the very least you need a beer".
I was reminded recently of these words (courtesy of T2Impact's LCC study http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/01/01/317187/the-future-of-low-cost-carriers-report.html) from the immortal Frank Zappa.
And I'm not sure that the debate over national airlines has actually become much more sophisticated in many parts of the world over the years. Apart from the "island economy" argument, where an air bridge could be of too much strategic importance to leave in the hands of others, there's a good case for investing resource on making yourself an attractive destination for outsiders to serve rather than maintaining your own airline.
And once you begin to deregulate the jig is going to be up anyhow: witness Olympic, Swissair, Sabena, Varig, Viasa et al......!
Vote for change!!!