BRUSSELS — A new EU rule mandating that a higher proportion of passengers pass through electronic identity border checks risks “wreaking significant discomfort on travelers,” warned the head of the bloc’s airport lobby. But a Commission spokesperson insisted that the electronic check system, which first went into limited use in October with a higher proportion of travelers to be checked from Friday, “has operated largely without issues.” The new Entry/Exit System is aimed at replacing passport stamps and cracking down on illegal stays in the bloc. Under the new system, travelers from third countries like the U.K. and the U.S. must register fingerprints and a facial image the first time they cross the frontier before reaching a border officer. But those extra steps are causing delays. In October, 10 percent of passengers had to use the new system; as of Friday, at least 35 percent of non-EU nationals entering the Schengen area for a short stay must use it. By April 10, the system will be fully in place. Its introduction last year caused issues at many airports, and industry worries that Friday’s step-up will cause a repeat. The EES “has resulted in border control processing times at airports increasing by up to 70 percent, with waiting times of up to three hours at peak traffic periods,” said Olivier Jankovec, director general of ACI Europe, adding that Friday’s new mandate is “sure to create even worse conditions.” Brussels Airport spokesperson Ihsane Chioua Lekhli said: “The introduction of EES has an impact on the waiting time for passengers and increases the need for sufficient staffing at border control,” adding: “Peak waiting times at arrival (entry of Belgium) can go up to three hours, and we also saw an increase of waiting times at departures.” But the Commission rejected the accusation that EES is wreaking havoc at EU airports. “Since its start, the system has operated largely without issues, even during the peak holiday period, and any initial challenges typical of new systems have been effectively addressed, moreover with it, we know who enter in the EU, when, and where,” said Markus Lammert, the European Commission’s spokesperson for internal affairs. Lamert said countries “have refuted the claim” made by ACI Europe of increased waiting times and that concerns over problems related to the new 35 percent threshold have been “disproven.” That’s in stark contrast with the view of the airport lobby, which pointed to recent problems in Portugal. Under the new system, travelers from third countries like the U.K. and the U.S. must register fingerprints and a facial image the first time they cross the frontier before reaching a border officer. | iStock “There are mounting operational issues with the EES rollout — the case in point being the suspension of the system by the Portuguese government over the holidays,” Jankovec said. In late December, the Portuguese government suspended the EES at Lisbon Humberto Delgado Airport for three months and deployed military personnel to bolster border control capabilities. ADR, which operates Rome Fiumicino Airport, is also seeing issues. “Operational conditions are proving highly complex, with a significant impact on passenger processing times at border controls,” ADR said in a written reply. Spain’s hotel industry association asked the country’s interior ministry to beef up staffing, warning of “recurring bottlenecks at border controls.” “It is unreasonable that, after a journey of several hours, tourists should face waits of an hour or more to enter the country,” said Jorge Marichal, the lobby’s president. The Spanish interior ministry said the EES is being used across the country with “no queues or significant incidents reported to date.” However, not all airports are having trouble implementing the new system. The ADP Group, which manages the two largest airports in Paris, said it has “not observed any chaos or increase in waiting times at this stage.”

BRUSSELS — Donald Trump blew up global efforts to cut emissions from shipping, and now the EU is terrified the U.S. president will do the same to any plans to tax carbon emissions from long-haul flights. The European Commission is studying whether to expand its existing carbon pricing scheme that forces airlines to pay for emissions from short- and medium-haul flights within Europe into a more ambitious effort covering all flights departing the bloc. If that happens, all international airlines flying out of Europe — including U.S. ones — would face higher costs, something that’s likely to stick in the craw of the Trump administration. “God only knows what the Trump administration will do” if Brussels expands its own Emissions Trading System to include transatlantic flights, a senior EU official told POLITICO. A big issue is how to ensure that the new system doesn’t end up charging only European airlines, which often complain about the higher regulatory burden they face compared with their non-EU rivals. The EU official said Commission experts are now “scratching their heads how you can, on the one hand, talk about extending the ETS worldwide … [but] also make sure that you have a bit of a level playing field,” meaning a system that doesn’t only penalize European carriers. Any new costs will hit airlines by 2027, following a Commission assessment that will be completed by July 1. Brussels has reason to be worried.  “Trump has made it very clear that he does not want any policies that harm business … So he does not want any environmental regulation,” said Marina Efthymiou, aviation management professor at Dublin City University. “We do have an administration with a bullying behavior threatening countries and even entities like the European Commission.” The new U.S. National Security Strategy, released last week, closely hews to Trump’s thinking and is scathing on climate efforts. “We reject the disastrous ‘climate change’ and ‘Net Zero’ ideologies that have so greatly harmed Europe, threaten the United States, and subsidize our adversaries,” it says. In October, the U.S. led efforts to prevent the International Maritime Organization from setting up a global tax to encourage commercial fleets to go green. The no-holds-barred push was personally led by Trump and even threatened negotiators with personal consequences if they went along with the measure. In October, the U.S. led efforts to prevent the International Maritime Organization from setting up a global tax aimed at encouraging commercial fleets to go green. | Nicolas Tucat/AFP via Getty Images This “will be a parameter to consider seriously from the European Commission” when it thinks about aviation, Efthymiou said. The airline industry hopes the prospect of a furious Trump will scare off the Commission. “The EU is not going to extend ETS to transatlantic flights because that will lead to a war,” said Willie Walsh, director general of the International Air Transport Association, the global airline lobby, at a November conference in Brussels. “And that is not a war that the EU will win.” EUROPEAN ETS VS. GLOBAL CORSIA In 2012, the EU began taxing aviation emissions through its cap-and-trade ETS, which covers all outgoing flights from the European Economic Area — meaning EU countries plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Switzerland and the U.K. later introduced similar schemes. In parallel, the U.N.’s International Civil Aviation Organization was working on its own carbon reduction plan, the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation. Given that fact, Brussels delayed imposing the ETS on flights to non-European destinations. The EU will now be examining the ICAO’s CORSIA to see if it meets the mark. “CORSIA lets airlines pay pennies for pollution — about €2.50 per passenger on a Paris-New York flight,” said Marte van der Graaf, aviation policy officer at green NGO Transport & Environment. Applying the ETS on the same route would cost “€92.40 per passenger based on 2024 traffic.” There are two reasons for such a big difference: the fourfold higher price for ETS credits compared with CORSIA credits, and the fact that “under CORSIA, airlines don’t pay for total emissions, but only for the increase above a fixed 2019 baseline,” Van der Graaf explained. “Thus, for a Paris-New York flight that emits an average of 131 tons of CO2, only 14 percent of emissions are offset under CORSIA. This means that, instead of covering the full 131 tons, the airline only has to purchase credits for approximately 18 tons.” Efthymiou, the professor, warned the price difference is projected to increase due to the progressive withdrawal of free ETS allowances granted to aviation. The U.N. scheme will become mandatory for all U.N. member countries in 2027 but will not cover domestic flights, including those in large countries such as the U.S., Russia and China. KEY DECISIONS By July 1, the Commission must release a report assessing the geographical coverage and environmental integrity of CORSIA. Based on this evaluation, the EU executive will propose either extending the ETS to all departing flights from the EU starting in 2027 or maintaining it for intra-EU flights only. Opposition to the ETS in the U.S. dates back to the Barack Obama administration. | Pete Souza/White House via Getty Images According to T&E, CORSIA doesn’t meet the EU’s climate goals. “Extending the scope of the EU ETS to all departing flights from 2027 could raise an extra €147 billion by 2040,” said Van der Graaf, noting that this money could support the production of greener aviation fuels to replace fossil kerosene. But according to Efthymiou, the Commission might decide to continue the current exemption “considering the very fragile political environment we currently have with a lunatic being in power,” she said, referring to Trump. “CORSIA has received a lot of criticism for sure … but the importance of CORSIA is that for the first time ever we have an agreement,” she added. “Even though that agreement might not be very ambitious, ICAO is the only entity with power to put an international regulation [into effect].” Regardless of what is decided in Brussels, Washington is prepared to fight. Opposition to the ETS in the U.S. dates back to the Barack Obama administration, when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sent a letter to the Commission opposing its application to American airlines. During the same term, the U.S. passed the EU ETS Prohibition Act, which gives Washington the power to prohibit American carriers from paying for European carbon pricing. John Thune, the Republican politician who proposed the bill, is now the majority leader of the U.S. Senate.

A large part of Airbus’s global fleet was grounded after the European airplane maker discovered a technical malfunction linked to solar radiation in its A320 family of aircraft. The European Union Aviation Safety Agency announced on Friday evening that it was temporarily pausing flights on certain Airbus planes after a JetBlue flight from Florida to Mexico had to make an emergency landing after a sudden loss of altitude. Media reports indicate that some 15 people were hospitalized after the incident. Airbus said in a statement late Friday that it had identified an issue with its workhorse A320 planes. “Intense solar radiation may corrupt data critical to the functioning of flight controls,” it said, adding that it had “identified a significant number” of affected aircraft. A number of airlines around Europe announced that they were affected, including Lufthansa, Swiss and Austrian Airlines. Brussels Airlines said that none of its flights was impacted. Sara Ricci, communications chief for Airbus’s commercial aircraft division, said that some 6,000 aircraft were affected, but that for 85 percent of the impacted aircraft, it would be a “quick fix” to the planes’ software. “The vast majority will be back in the sky very soon,” Ricci said.

BRUSSELS — Iberia and TAP Air Portugal were banned from operating in Venezuela Thursday as tensions rise between the South American country and the United States. Venezuela’s National Institute of Civil Aviation (INAC) announced the “revocation of the concession” to operate in the country on Instagram, accusing the airlines of “joining in the acts of state terrorism promoted by the government of the U.S.” The decision was a response to the suspension of operations in Venezuela by Iberia and TAP, as well as Turkish Airlines, Colombia’s Avianca, Chile’s LATAM Airlines, and Brazil’s Gol, due to safety concerns as of Nov. 22. The carriers suspended operations after the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration warned on Nov. 21 of a “worsening security situation and heightened military activity” in Venezuela. The Spanish authority AESA joined the warning on Nov. 24. U.S. President Donald Trump has moved forces close to Venezuela and there is growing worry that the U.S. may attack. The day after Spain’s warning, Venezuela’s INAC requested that the six airlines resume operations within 48 hours, threatening to suspend their traffic rights if they did not comply. They did not, so the Venezuelan authority followed through by banning them. “Iberia cannot operate in areas where there is a high safety risk. This is currently the case in Venezuela,” the Spanish airline, which is part of the IAG Group, told POLITICO. “Iberia hopes to resume flights to Venezuela as soon as possible, once full safety conditions are in place.”

LONDON — The U.K. government is not moving fast enough to slash planet-destroying emissions from aviation, former Prime Minister Tony Blair has warned.  Governments in Westminster and elsewhere must step up progress in developing cleaner alternatives to traditional jet fuel, according to a report today from Blair’s think tank, seen by POLITICO.  “Aviation is and will continue to be one of the world’s most hard-to-abate sectors. Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) mandates in Europe and the U.K. are ramping up, but the new fuels needed are not developing fast enough to sufficiently reduce airline emissions,” the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) said, referring to policies designed to force faster production of cleaner fuel.  The U.K. has made the rollout of SAF central to hitting climate targets while expanding airport capacity.  It is the third intervention on U.K. net-zero policy from the former prime minister this year.  Earlier this month, the TBI urged Energy Secretary Ed Miliband to drop his pursuit of a clean power system by 2030 and focus instead on reducing domestic bills. This followed a report in April claiming the government’s approach to net zero was “doomed to fail” — something which caused annoyance at the top of the government and “pissed off” Labour campaigners then door-knocking ahead of local elections.  Aviation contributed seven percent of the U.K.’s annual greenhouse gas emissions in 2022, equivalent to around 29.6 million tons of CO2. The Climate Change Committee estimates that will rise to 11 percent by the end of the decade and 16 percent by 2035.  SAFs can be produced from oil and feedstocks and blended with traditional fuels to reduce emissions. The U.K. government’s SAF mandate targets its use in 40 percent of jet fuels by 2040 — up from two percent in 2025.  Chancellor Rachel Reeves said in January that U.K. investment in SAF production will help ensure planned airport expansion at Heathrow —  announced as the government desperately pursues economic growth — does not break legally-binding limits on emissions.  The TBI urged Energy Secretary Ed Miliband to drop his pursuit of a clean power system by 2030 and focus instead on reducing domestic bills. | Wiktor Szymanowicz/Getty Images The TBI said that, while it expects efficiency gains and initial SAF usage will have an impact on emissions, a “large share of flights, both in Europe and globally, will continue to run on conventional kerosene.” A spokesperson for the Department for Transport said the government was “seeing encouraging early signs towards meeting the SAF mandate.” They added: “Not backing SAF is not an option. It is a core part of the global drive to decarbonise aviation. SAF is already being produced and supplied at scale in the U.K., and we recently allocated a further £63 million of funding to further grow domestic production.” The TBI said carbon dioxide removal plans should be integrated into both jet fuel sales and sustainable aviation fuel mandates, placing “the financial responsibility of removals at the feet of those most able to pay it.” 

The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled Thursday that pets can be considered “baggage,” dealing a setback to pet owners seeking higher compensation for animals lost during international flights. The decision comes from a case in which a dog escaped from its pet-carrier at Buenos Aires airport in October 2019 and was never recovered. Its owner had sought €5,000 in compensation from Iberia airlines, which admitted the loss but argued that liability is limited under EU rules for checked baggage. The high court concluded that the 1999 Montreal Convention, which governs airline liability for baggage, applies to all items transported in the hold, including pets. While EU and Spanish laws recognize animals as sentient beings, the Luxembourg-based court emphasized that the Montreal Convention’s framework is focused on material compensation for lost or damaged items. Airlines are therefore not obligated to pay amounts exceeding the compensation caps set under the Montreal Convention unless passengers declare a “special interest” in the item, a mechanism designed for inanimate belongings. “The court finds that pets are not excluded from the concept of ‘baggage’. Even though the ordinary meaning of the word ‘baggage’ refers to objects, this alone does not lead to the conclusion that pets fall outside that concept,” the court said in a statement. Thursday’s ruling reaffirms the current framework, limiting airlines’ liability for lost pets unless passengers make a special declaration to raise coverage. For airlines operating in Europe, it offers legal certainty and shields them from larger claims. The court’s judgment will guide national courts in balancing international air transport law with EU animal welfare standards.

A European diplomatic staffer in Belarus was among 52 prisoners released on Thursday in a deal brokered by Washington. Under the pact, Minsk agreed to free dozens of political prisoners after the U.S. consented to lift sanctions on its national airline. Mikalai Khilo, a Belarusian member of staff at the EU’s mission to Minsk, had been sentenced in January to four years in a penal colony. Viasna, a Belgian human rights NGO that has tracked his case, posited in the wake of his April 2024 arrest that he had been charged with insulting strongman leader Alexander Lukashenko. “Mikalai safely arrived at our Representation in Vilnius,” said Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in a post on X Thursday afternoon. She thanked U.S. President Donald Trump for his “support” in securing the deal. According to an EU official who was granted anonymity to speak freely, Khilo was originally apprehended by the Belarusian KGB intelligence service in front of the EU delegation office. According to Viasna, 1,153 people continue to be detained as political prisoners in Belarus.

The European Union and the United States have issued a statement to formalize their tariff truce. Now the hard work begins. The framework agreement builds out the handshake trade agreement struck by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and U.S. President Donald Trump in Scotland in late July. The text sets out a roadmap for implementing the trade commitments they made. “This is not the end; it’s the beginning. This framework is a first step,” EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefcovič said. But the document, which runs to only four pages, skirts several issues. For one, it doesn’t mention U.S. calls for the EU to dilute its regulation of Big Tech. Nor does it refer to a call by Brussels for European wines and spirits to be exempted from the 15 percent U.S. baseline tariff that took effect this month. That’s one that Šefcovič still hopes to get a deal on. We break down the wins, the losses, the fudges — and the omissions — from the Framework on an Agreement on Reciprocal, Fair, and Balanced Trade. CARS  Under the joint statement, the U.S. will lower its 27.5 percent tariffs on cars and automotive parts to match the baseline 15 percent.  But there’s a catch: The U.S. will only meet its lower tariff commitment after the EU eliminates “tariffs on all U.S. industrial goods,” including its own 10 percent tariff on vehicles. Šefčovič said the Commission will initiate legislation this month to ensure Washington lowers tariffs retroactively on cars and auto parts effective Aug. 1, as foreseen in the deal. A separate clause of the joint statement makes clear that the two governments will start collaborating in other areas around cars, including to “provide mutual recognition on each other’s standards.”  The joint statement doesn’t clarify which standards will be mutually recognized, but any change will have ripple effects across the sector. “By signing up to mutual recognition of vehicle standards with the United States, the European Union has waved the white flag on road safety,” said Antonio Avenoso, executive director of the European Transport Safety Council. “This is not a technical detail — it is a political choice that puts trade convenience ahead of saving lives.” — Jordyn Dahl DRUGS, SEMICONDUCTORS, STEEL These industries are at the heart of Washington’s efforts to relocate industry back to the United States and are covered by separate trade investigations, known as Section 232, which allow the U.S. president to restrict imports to protect national security.  The U.S. will cap tariffs on European pharmaceuticals, lumber and semiconductors at 15 percent regardless of the results of the ongoing investigations.  Steel and aluminum imports will continue to face a 50 percent tariff until the EU and the U.S. explore the possibility of joining forces to tackle overproduction. | Erik S. Lesser/EPA This ceiling doesn’t apply to steel and aluminum imports, however, which will continue to face a 50 percent tariff until the EU and the U.S. explore the possibility of joining forces to tackle overproduction — especially coming from China — and the possibility of setting tariff-rate quotas. The European pharmaceuticals industry warns that the outline trade deal could cost companies up to €18 billion. “We remain concerned for the future of patients and our sector in Europe,” said Nathalie Moll, director general at Europe’s EFPIA pharma lobby. Still, while branded pharmaceuticals could end up being subject to the tariffs, the EU did succeed in broadening an exemption for lower-priced generics. — Camille Gijs and Mari Eccles DIGITAL RULES  The European Union managed to keep its rules on digital competition and content moderation out of the U.S. trade deal, despite heavy pressure. For now.  The Commission has for months maintained that its ability to regulate U.S. Big Tech companies is not part of the trade negotiations.  The Trump administration has been on a campaign, attacking both rulebooks and claiming they amount to censorship of Americans (the Digital Services Act) and unfairly target U.S. companies (the Digital Markets Act). While Šefčovič confirmed to reporters on Thursday that the rules weren’t part of the talks, he didn’t rule out that the two sides would return to the issue in the future.  “We kept these issues out of the trade negotiations. We were focusing on what was very clearly the priority and therefore you won’t find it referenced in the joint statement,” he said. “Will it come later, will it be discussed? Our relationship is so vast that for sure there will be a lot of issues which will be discussed.” European Parliament lawmakers will continue to pressure the Commission not to treat the rules as a bargaining chip. “Tech legislation and tariffs are two distinct matters and should remain such,” said Bulgarian conservative lawmaker Eva Maydell. — Pieter Haeck WINES AND SPIRITS Wines and spirits won’t be exempted from tariffs, even though the European Union pushed hard to obtain relief for a sector that has been caught in the crossfire from both Washington and Beijing. This means they will be subject to a 15 percent U.S. tariff.  That’s a blow for European exporters, who long benefited from tariff-free access on most spirits until successive trade wars tore it up. Wines and spirits won’t be exempted from tariffs, even though the European Union pushed hard to obtain relief for a sector that has been caught in the crossfire from both Washington and Beijing. | Guillaume Horcajuelo/EPA Šefčovič admitted that the talks had fallen short — but insisted the fight isn’t over.  “The tariffs on wine and spirits was one of the very important offensive interests of the European Union. Unfortunately, here we didn’t succeed … but the doors are not closed forever,” he told reporters.  — Bartosz Brzeziński GREEN RULES  The EU made a vague promise to address U.S. concerns regarding EU laws on mandatory sustainability reporting (the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive), supply chain oversight (the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive) and deforestation (the EU Deforestation Regulation). Brussels mainly pitched ideas it already wants to implement, however.   The EU will ensure its rules “do not pose undue restrictions on transatlantic trade” by reducing the administrative burden on businesses in the CSDDD and by proposing changes to the EU’s civil liability regime, which holds companies legally accountable for human rights violations and environmental damage in their supply chains.   Scrapping the EU’s liability regime is already a major point in the Commission’s omnibus proposal announced last February, which rolls back many features of the CSRD and CSDDD among other files.  Crucially, those changes have not yet received the official green light from EU countries or lawmakers.   On deforestation, the EU says it recognizes that U.S. commodities production “poses negligible risk to global deforestation,” having already labeled the country as “low risk” in its classification system last May.  — Marianne Gros AVIATION Washington commits to exempting aircraft and parts from higher tariffs, applying its very low most favored nation duties to the industry. Irish lobbyists are breathing a collective sigh of relief. A trade war slapping American tariffs on Airbus and European tariffs on Boeing would have hit the industry’s key middleman, Dublin, particularly hard. The Irish capital is the world’s biggest hub for aircraft leasing with an ecosystem of lessors and financial advisers overseeing most of the world’s leased aircraft. Ireland’s Central Statistics Office values that Irish-managed fleet at €268 billion.  Small wonder, then, that Prime Minister Micheál Martin singled out aviation when welcoming the newly published details of the EU-U.S. agreement. “Given the significance of the airline sector to Ireland, a specific carve-out for aircraft and aircraft parts is welcome,” he said. — Shawn Pogatchnik DEFENSE  The EU promised to buy more American weapons under Thursday’s trade deal, although a senior official downplayed any impact on efforts to boost Europe’s military industrial complex. The EU “plans to substantially increase procurement of military and defence equipment from the United States, with the support and facilitation of the U.S. government,” the joint statement said.  That could deal a blow to the European defense industry, which Brussels has been trying to strengthen with initiatives like the €150 billion loans-for-weapons Security Action for Europe regulation to boost joint procurement, or the €1.5 billion European Defence Industry Programme still under discussion with the European Parliament. — Jacopo Barigazzi INVESTMENTS Although it’s unclear how exactly it will fulfill its promises, the EU “intends to” procure $750 billion worth of U.S. energy, including liquefied natural gas, oil and nuclear energy products, through 2028.  It will also buy “at least” $40 billion worth of U.S. artificial intelligence chips. Europe already relies heavily on U.S.-based AI chip suppliers such as Nvidia, since it has no own-production capacity in that space.  On top of that, “European companies are expected to invest an additional $600 billion across strategic sectors in the United States through 2028,” the document adds. — Camille Gijs and Pieter Haeck

The European Court of Human Rights on Wednesday ruled Russia is responsible for downing flight MH17 in 2014 and human rights violations during its war in Ukraine. The decision marks the first time an international court has found Russia guilty of international human rights abuses since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022, and ruled on Russia’s role in the MH17 disaster. The judges are set to rule on a total of four cases, brought against Russia by Ukraine and the Netherlands, including the abduction of Ukrainian children to Russia in 2014 and violations during the armed conflict in Ukraine’s Russian-occupied Donbas. “In none of the conflicts previously before [the Court had] there been such near universal condemnation of the ‘flagrant’ disregard by the respondent State for the foundations of the international legal order established after the Second World War,” said the Strasbourg-based court in its judgment. Malaysia Airlines flight 17 was traveling from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur on July 17, 2014, when it was hit by a surface-to-air missile over eastern Ukraine, during the conflict between pro-Russia rebels and Ukrainian forces in the region. All 298 passengers on board were killed, among them 196 Dutch citizens. In November 2022, a Dutch court found guilty of murder and sentenced (in absentia) to life imprisonment Russian nationals Igor Girkin, Sergey Dubinskiy and Ukrainian national Leonid Kharchenko. Girkin, a pro-war Russian nationalist, was also sentenced by Russia to four years on charges of inciting extremism after complaining too much about President Vladimir Putin’s leadership of the war against Ukraine. The Dutch court also confirmed a previous Dutch-led joint international investigation concluded in 2018 that the airliner was downed by a surface-to-air missile launched from pro-Russian separatist-controlled territory in Eastern Ukraine. In January 2023, a Dutch court ruled that the Netherlands could bring a case before the European Court of Human Rights over the downing of the flight. It argued that Russia was responsible for the crash, due to its support for the self-proclaimed republics of Luhansk and Donetsk. Russian authorities have repeatedly denied any involvement in the attack. The United Nations Aviation Council found Russia responsible for downing the plane in May, stating that it failed to uphold its obligations under international air law, which requires that states “refrain from resorting to the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight.” The ECHR, an international court of the Council of Europe, stated that it had jurisdiction to rule on complaints concerning events that occurred before Sept. 16, 2022, when Russia was excluded from the organization.

KYIV — Russian President Vladimir Putin fired Transport Minister Roman Starovoit early Monday, according to a decree published by the Kremlin. The government provided no official explanation for Starovoit’s firing, but it comes after Ukrainian drone attacks over the weekend sparked turmoil for Russian air traffic, with stranded passengers stuck in airports as flights were canceled. According to Russia’s federal air transport agency and the Russian transport ministry, Russian airlines canceled 485 flights, while 88 flights had to be redirected and 1,900 flights were delayed in the period from Saturday to Monday. Airlines had to issue 43,000 forced ticket refunds, accommodate 94,000 people in hotels, and provide food and drink worth 354,000 rubles (€3,800). Russian pro-government media website Kommersant reported that the transport issues will cost billions of rubles (more than €200,000). Ukrainian drones have repeatedly forced Russia to close its airspace for civilian traffic, as Kyiv targets military plants and other sites as it looks to inflict domestic pain on Putin. Starovoit, former governor of Russia’s Kursk region, was appointed to lead the transport ministry in 2024.