Back to Squawk list
  • 90

Voted Out: Russia Loses ICAO Council Seat

Russia has lost its place on the International Civil Aviation Organization's (ICAO) 36-member governing council after failing to win enough votes from fellow members. The country's violation of Ukrainian airspace and "theft" of hundreds of foreign aircraft was cited against it. Russia out of ICAO governing council Russia will no longer be part of the ICAO's governing council following its actions in Ukraine this year. The country received 80 votes, six short of the… ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

k1121j 21
Wow they still received 80 votes!
ThePumpkin 9
Truly stunning eh?
Etienne Daniels 22
Not directly related but these criminals still have a veto right within the UN.
Iain Girling 24
A point that has not escaped many of us and one that needs addressing immediately.
Scott Maitland 2
I think Zelensky’s idea that the Founding Member of the UN was the Soviet Union which was disbanded in 1991 therefore Russia should not have a security council vote is an obvious one and needs to be explored.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Rob Palmer -5
Thomas King 27
Surprised it took them this long.
Ann Fitz 6
What’s really disturbing is that they got any votes at all.
Joe Keifer 13
Now if only the UN can get it's act together..................
w2bsa 13
Unfortunately, because of the way the UN governs itself, allowing one nation to veto the votes in the security council, it will never get its act together.
Joe Keifer 0
Yup! 73s sir!
Dale Johnson 1
That will require at least a dozen cocktail party's and dinners, even then it's doubtful.
Carl-Otto Jaeschke 4
Not that it matters, but it was about time to take this step.
lynx318 4
Meh, all good.
Vincent Amanor-Boadu 3
What are the long-term implications of this decision many of us are celebrating? Would our short-term victory come back and bite us in the long-run? Don't ever forget 1938!! Emotions are a poor counsellor.
Ben Bosley 2
They haven't been voted out of ICAO, just the governing council body.
James Werner 5
Just trying to wrap my head around 80 countries voting for Russia inclusion. How much more damning evidence do they need?
Mark Henley 3
For the 80 that voted in favor, NO amount of evidence will ever be enough... They don't care about facts or evidence.
Michael Dealey 2
You mean like everyone posting here who have all the facts backwards?

"We'll Know Our Disinformation Program is Complete When Everything The American Public Believes is False". - William Casey, CIA Director 1981
Dennis Fernkes 4
Absolutely, Russia should be removed from the ICAO.
thiagocsf 2
I think they just have.
Leander Williams 4
I think a more important step would be for the free world NOT to recognize the illegal annexations in Ukraine.
John Percival 3
Now do it to the Chinese and N Koreans
Jay Walthall 1
Who voted for them?
Bruce Johnson 1
Proper link for the story:

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

splautz 12
Russia invaded Ukraine simply because their puppet government was voted out in a free and fair election. Ukraine never fired a shot at Russia, nor threatened them in anyway. There is nothing more to it than that. Also, Russia's international commercial aviation has been largely blocked since the start of the war, and that's not going away anytime soon. So if a country isn't participating (or can't) to global aviation, they have no business being in the ICAO with the countries who do, no matter the actual size of their country.
Michael Dealey -3
You, like most of the commenters here, have no idea what you're talking about. You are simply repeating corporate media propaganda. "There is nothing more to it than that" is about the most laughable thing I've ever heard. To understand what's actually going on in Ukraine today, you have to go all the way back to the end of World War II. But most Americans have the attention span of a gnat and can't be bothered to educate themselves, so they latch onto whatever sounds good and whatever is deemed the politically correct thing to think by the media.
In short, they're lazy and let other people do their thinking for them.

Never fired a shot at Russia?
Where DO you get your news?
What do you call bombing and shooting ethnic Russians in the eastern part of Ukraine for the last eight years? And do I even need to mention the US/DoD funded Bio-weapons labs?
Did the news tell you that was a conspiracy?

I guess you've never heard the leaked audio of Victoria Nuland discussing which controllable assets should be placed into power on behalf of the US.

There was no "free and fair election". There was a color revolution sponsored by George Soros along with US deep state think tanks to install a government that would play ball with the United States as our proxy against Russia. And the ultimate goal isn't just about taking out Russia, it's about collapsing all of Western Europe so that the US can maintain hegemony over the world, both militarily and financially -- and their willing to start WWIII to do it.
splautz 3
Ok... so the puppet was overthrown by the people. Why? Obviously the pup did something the masses did not like at all. Perhaps that was to support Russia and they did not want that?? That ever cross your mind? Instead of Russia putting up another pro-Russian puppet to try to win the next election, they start to invade. That's not how it's done. You don't just invade another sovereign country's territory because you don't like who is in power, especially when they didn't even fire a shot or threaten you in anyway. Putin simply didn't not like having no control over the country, which means less money in his pocket.

As for as going back to WWII crap. Were you even alive during WWII? No, so it is irrelevant. We could go all the way back to ancient times and make different "claims". The fact is, they are their own country, including Crimea, was made independent in 1991 with the fall of the Soviet Union. That is the world's accepted view, and no one, not even Russia disagreed with this at the time and for decades later.

As for as NATO expansion, up until early 2000's, NATO wasn't expanding in response to Russia being a threat. They were expanding for anti-terrorism reasons, mostly from the middle east like Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Russia was our friends at that time. There was even talk of Russia joining NATO, and they were even an official NATO partner. The problem is, Putin somehow got upset with the Iraq war and that gave him bad ideas. I guess just because Bush made a bad mistake, he thinks he can invade whoever he wants now. Yes, but America didn't annex lands. They disposed the puppet and gave the countries back to elect their own new leaders in free and fair elections, or even overthrows as in the case of Afghanistan.

Putin's excuse for invading and annexing? "Oh.. we have Russian speakers there." LOL What are the history of these? They were placed there by the Soviet Union to "Russify" other peoples lands. So the appropriate thing to do is give these ethnic Russians an opportunity to come back to Russia where they came from or stay and accept the government of where they live, not go in shooting and kill most of them in the process!!! Putins true intent is not the Russian speakers, it's the resources of the land. In Ukraine's case, it's the oil is is truly after, along with the access to the sea. Can you imagine if the US started invading other countries because there were English speakers? LOL
splautz 3
And do you even know the history of Kaliningrad? Russia committed genocide to kill or move millions of Germans off that land to "Russifa" it and claim it as their own. Look up the history. So in your logic, Europe has every right to invade and annex Kaliningrad because it use to be their lands and genocide was used to illegally capture it. That's what is going to eventually happen if Putin keeps doubling down on trying to claim Ukraine. As if not enough bad stuff for him hasn't already happened.. global sanctions, two more countries have joined NATO, Ukraine has applied for EU and NATO membership, NATO countries have become more unified and building up their forces along Russia's border, millions of young people have left Russia likely for good due to mobilizations and said sanctions, etc. Hope you like your leader! hahah
Michael Dealey -2
Boy, you really have swallowed the "official narrative" of everything, hook, line, and sinker. First of all, again, the "people" did not overthrow the Ukrainian Government in 2014.

And then you say "You don't just invade another sovereign country's territory because you don't like who is in power"... You mean like the United States has done for the last 50 years? You know, like Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Guatemala, Honduras, Vietnam, Korea, name a few. Most of these countries were invaded directly and some were simply overthrown through covert means.

This wasn't about stopping "terrorism". That's the blanket excuse for everything. Who do you think created, funded, trained, and armed ISIS and Al-Qaeda? It was the US. You know what the sin of most of these countries was? They didn't want a private western central bank in their country.

Hell, in the case of Guatemala, we overthrew the government because the "American Fruit Company" (later Chiquita) was going to be expelled from the country (a sovereign nation) because of it's destructive environmental practices and its brutal treatment of local employees. They didn't like this and had a lot of new found success and money, so in order to avoid this, the CIA launched a campaign against the newly elected president, painting him as a "communist" and starting a color revolution to have him toppled. The US then installed someone who was willing to let the US company stay (all the brainchild of Edward Bernays). Back in the US, the gullible American public were given the story that "the threat of communism at our southern border has been vanquished..." all a lie so some banana company could continue their abusive human rights and environmental practices.

The mainstream version of history is rarely the truth, and sometimes you have to go back in time to understand the present. Your attitude of not caring about what happened in Ukraine after WWII is indicative of success of getting people to forget the past, so they can be easily manipulated into believing whatever narrative is convenient for the perpetrators of current events.

And don't get me started on Kaliningrad. Yes, it was a horrible event in history, but just try googling it and see if you can find an unbiased account of the *whole* story. Almost non of them mention who invaded who *first* -- because it was decided centuries ago that Russia was to be the the ever-present boogeyman, the eternal scapegoat and/excuse for the west's behavior. And the reason for that goes back nearly a thousand years.

Everything you think you know about all of these wars, especially in the middle east, is a lie.
They were never about terrorism or protecting "democracy". Ukraine is no different. It is a proxy for US interests. It is the epicenter of western deep-state operations. This is why the US is freaking out over a country it should logically have no interest in at all. Where do you think all of these billions of American dollars are really going?

Sorry to tell you, but the US and Zelensky are the "baddies" in this situation.
Andy Ridings 2
Read what Michael has to say, verify it and then see if you are still a sheep soaking up mainstream propaganda.........and wearing a mask to keep you safe!
splautz 1
And the crazy part about all this is, what is Putin's end game? There is no way the West is going to let them have any inch of Ukraine after this. Even if Russia's army outlasts Ukraine's, that doesn't mean the end to it. NATO will take over at that point so there will never be uncontested territory there. It will always be targeted and bombed at strategic times, if for no other reason than to scare any "Russian speakers" to ever want to settle there, nor would any companies want to move in there to do any kind of mining or drilling. So I'm confused what he's trying to do. Kill off his army for Ukraine's and then have a big DMZ that no one can use? I guess. Because that's actually his best case scenario at this point, assuming his army doesn't peter out first.
Michael Dealey -2
If you have the intellectual honesty to challenge your own beliefs, I would suggest reading this article (I wasn't even looking for it -- it just coincidentally came up in a feed I follow).

I would also suggest clicking on the underlined links as they appear to fully understand the nuances, and would highly encourage you to watch the documentary by Oliver Stone linked to in the article. Just that in itself should be informative enough, if you don't like reading.
Michael Dealey -3
NATO will take over? Really? The time for that to happen would have been about six months ago.
Despite all the sabre rattling and rhetoric, no one really wants a war with Russia -- except radical NWO zealots and bankers. And without the support of the United States, who's going to continue all of this intermittent bombing of the eastern region? Have you conveniently forgotten that there was no bombing at all until Zelensky was installed? And who was doing the bombing? Not Russia.

I don't think you realize that up to this point, Russia has only utilized a fraction of it's resources. The goal wasn't to take over the country. If that had been the goal, Putin could have indiscriminately bombed Ukraine into oblivion in a matter of days.

Putin has been very conservative with what targets he hitting, because he's not a war with the Ukrainian people. He's at war with the US/NATO puppet government running Ukraine. So far, he's allowed them the luxury of fighting this war with their electricity, communications, rail lines, major industries, and roads, still in tact.

Putin's end game is exactly what he says it is (and exactly what the MSM says is a "conspiracy").
He's been talking about it ad nauseam for years. You should go listen to what he has to say, and possibly "fact check" his points of concern.
hhwff -2
splautz,I invite you to read up on Victoria Nuland's participation in that "free and fair" election.
Constantly moving NATO up to Russia's borders in spite of having given them assurances to the contrary was a huge red flag for them. After decades of warnings and voiced concerns were completely ignored and dismissed by the west, Russia finally acted. Since 2014 when Nudelman interfered and had the elected president ousted, the new regime openly stated their intention of genociding the civilians in the Donbass region and has been shelling them for the last 8 years killing over 14000 civilians. Finally Russia acted to protect the Russian speaking Donbass population.
Before you demonize Russia and infer Kiev is on innocent victim, please read up on what has been occurring there over the last century or so.
Michael Dealey -1
Thank you. Someone who's bothered to inform themselves through research, rather than relying on Lester Holt or Joy Behar.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

DaveRK 13
NOW there's an intelligent comment that has nothing, 0, nada, zero relevantto do with the topic.
jeroberts88 7
So, with that remark I can assume you are writing your "stupid comment" from Russia.
DonDengler -9
With a bottle of vodka

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

DaveRK 12
While everyone is entitled to an opinion, at some point rational, practical & common sense thinkers get tired of boring senseless off-topic comments.
Based on your previous diatribes I thought you were "done with all this nonsense".
Please be done with it already, go find a place to whine yourself to sleep.
Andy Ridings 0
Ain't that a fact Don

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

klicker 38
I don't recall anyone attacking - or threatening to attack - Russia. Quit whining that the land grab attempt is failing miserably and blaming the rest of the world for it. If Russia had not tried that, they would not be in the place they are now. Their situation is self inflicted, they now live with the consequences for decades to come. Suck it up.
Michael Dealey 1
Failing? According to who? Didn't the eastern regions just vote themselves out of Ukraine and into Russia?

And you don't recall eight years of Ukraine attacking ethnic Russians in it's eastern regions?
You know nothing about the west's promise not to advance NATO closer to Russia?
You know nothing about DoD funded bioweapons labs in Ukraine.
You haven't paid any attention to Putin, warning the west for years that Ukraine would be a red-line? How would do you think the US would respond if Russia had nukes at the Canadian and Mexican border?

You're deluded if you think Russia is "losing".
lynx318 33
"It's no secret that the US has it in for Russia since the end of WWII."

Really? Putin seems to be following Stalin's example of murderous debauchery. Most definitely NOT imaginary.
Michael Dealey -2
And where do you get that information? Example?
I think people have forgotten that Russia hasn't been a communist country for over 30 years now.
Putin does not want war. He wants the West to get out of his business and stop surrounding his country with tactical missiles, for no reason.

In case you haven't noticed, our government is insane. They're almost giddy at the thought of a nuclear exchange.

"It's no secret that the US has it in for Russia since the end of WWII".. is an accurate statement. But you have to ask yourself, who really controls the US. It ain't who you think it is.
tpmorrow 31
Erik Bruner is a Russian bot - he rears his ugly head whenever Russia, particularly in relation to its wholesale destruction of Ukraine in its illegal war launched by an autocrat spewing lies about Ukrainian "Nazis" and other such nonsense, is mentioned in a negative light.
Michael Dealey 2
Why, because he states facts you don't want to hear?
Turn off your TV, stop reading the first state-sanctioned story your phone shoves in your face, and do some independent research. Maybe you'll learn you've been lied to.
hhwff -2
Eric, your comments are correct. I find it troubling to see the complete lack of effort by the majority of people (and specifically those on this forum ) to accept unquestioningly the official narratives instead of seeking actual facts and history. Even a cursory review of the concerns voiced by Lavrov, Shoigu Putin and Medvedev over the last couple of decades should give rise to many questions about the west's (US/UK ) out of hand dismissals of what these Russians were saying. When one reads the Rand papers, one cannot but come to the conclusion that the objective of the US is to bait Russia in order to trap it into a situation where it can be weakened to the point of destruction so it can be pillaged and raped by the self appointed hegemon. The Russians have leaders who are acutely aware of this and in the light of all the agreements with the US that the US unilaterally broke, they now realize the existential nature of the battle they are in.
It really is sad that so few in the west recognize what is happening.... and so keep drinking the koolaid that is offered them.
great wildblueyonder 3
hhwff - yet another Russian BOT. Russia was invited and attended NATO meetings in the past. For Russia to claim that NATO is a threat is patently false. Russia remained paranoid and abusive. Putin is in many ways worse than Hitler in his targeting of civilians and territorial claims just because "some" Russian speakers exist in territories that they covet.
Michael Dealey 0
You don't know what you're talking about. Of course NATO is a threat to Russia. That's its entire purpose. You know why NATO was created, right? So why does it still even exist? Putin isn't a communist, contrary to what you may think.

You sound like Ilhan Omar excusing terrorists by claiming "some people did something" on 911.
Tens of thousands of people in Eastern Ukraine have been murdered over the last eight years by a terrorist campaign out of Kiev against their own people. Completely unprovoked attacks against defenseless civilians.

I'll side with the Russian bots rather than the NWO apologists.
Michael Dealey 1
People are brainwashed. They need a scapegoat and a simple sound byte to explain complex world with complex problems and are unable, unwilling, and/or too lazy to question their television.

How many times does the media have to be caught in a lie before people breakup with them? If they were your significant other, you'd have divorced them a long time ago.

Look at everything we now know (some of knew all along) about "Russian Collusion" and Covid that ended up being total fabrications. People have really short memories. They just want to be viewed as having the politically correct opinion by supporting the current "thing", rather than risk ridicule.

Unfortunately, that's exactly how we got into the mess we're in now.
lynx318 1
Oh we see what is going on, Putin is a communistic KGB stalwart to the bone.
Nolan Clinard -3
" I don't recall Russia Violating Ukrainian airspace. Seems to me many aircraft have landed in Ukraine with tons of weapons."

The two are not mutually exclusive.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.