MH17失事之後 世界上什麼變了
In the wake of the latest disaster involving Malaysia Airlines, more and more questions are being asked about the financial viability of the airline, as well as the legal fallout and the rights of victims’ families.
最新一起馬航墜機事件發生後，人們不斷地對馬航的財務能力、法律責任以及遇難者家屬的權利提出了很多問題。But financial questions aside, there are distinct differences between MH 370 and MH 17.
拋開財務問題暫且不談，MH370和MH17這兩起事故之間有一些顯著差異。MH 370 remains a mystery (and may remain so for quite some time). It’s also one of the more unusual crashes from an insurance payout perspective because it’s very difficult to litigate negligence and liability in the absence of any hard evidence. It may turn out to be one of the least expensive cases in history.
MH370仍是一個謎（而且可能在很長一段時間內都是如此）。從保險賠償的角度而言，這也是不同尋常的一起事故，因爲在缺乏確鑿證據的情況下，很難以過失和追責提起訴訟。這可能成爲史上賠償最少的事故之一。
MH17, however, is very different. The issue won’t be whether claims will be filed, but when, where and how many defendants will be named. Already there’s a huge shopping list of defendants, ranging from the airline (always named in cases relating to a plane crash) to individual governments. Remember Pan Am 103? In the end the Libyan government paid large settlements to the families. But given the current situation in the Ukraine, the legal process here could get very messy and very complicated very quickly.
但是，MH17墜機事故完全不一樣。問題不在於是否會提出索賠，而是何時何地提出索賠，將涉及多少名被告。現在已有一大批潛在被告，從馬來西亞航空公司（在飛機失事的案例中航空公司肯定是被告）一直到個別政府。還記得泛美航空103航班嗎？最後利比亞政府向遇難者家屬支付了鉅額賠償金。但考慮到烏克蘭目前的形勢，此次事故的法律程序可能會變得非常混亂和複雜。It could ultimately end — at least in the civil cases filed — with a judgment issued against the Russian government, if families and governments can prove the country armed the separatist rebels allegedly responsible for the crash. That would likely take years, and almost certainly, Russia would either appeal, or simply ignore the judgment. If that happens, there’s precedent to expect at least an attempt by those parties to seize Russian assets in various countries around the world. First country expected to file lawsuit? The Netherlands. The assets likely to be on the target list: Aeroflot planes on the ground in foreign airports, and Russian cruise ships in foreign ports.
如果遇難者的家屬和政府能夠證明俄羅斯爲烏克蘭分裂分子提供了肇事武器（據稱客機是被烏克蘭分裂分子擊落），最終的判決可能會對俄羅斯政府不利（至少在民事訴訟案件中會是這樣）。這可能需要幾年的時間，而且幾乎可以肯定的是，俄羅斯要麼上訴，要麼乾脆無視審判結果。如果出現這種情況，依據先例，至少相關方會試圖沒收俄羅斯在世界各國的資產。那麼哪個國家可能會首先提起訴訟呢？荷蘭。可能會出現在沒收目標清單上的資產包括俄羅斯航空公司停靠在國外機場的飛機以及停泊在外國港口的俄羅斯遊輪。In the short term, the Montreal convention protocols for awarding victims’ families payment will again be applied. The 1999 agreement limits claimants to about $174,000 per death, and will be paid regardless of the cause of the crash, including war or terrorism. (This payment could be as high as $49 million, and would come from Malaysia Airlines’ insurers.)
在短期內，有關方面將再次依據蒙特利爾公約向遇難者家屬進行賠償。該公約於1999年簽訂，規定每位遇難者的賠償數額爲174,000美元，而且賠償金支付不受事故原因（包括戰爭或恐怖主義）的限制。（此次賠償金額可能高達4900萬美元，而且可能由馬來西亞航空的保險公司支付。）But claimants will most certainly seek more damages. And in this case, one of the claimants will most certainly be Malaysia Airlines itself.
但索賠人肯定會要求更多賠償。在這種情況下，馬來西亞航空公司本身肯定也會提起索賠。Insurance issues aside, there are other immediate ramifications. For one, the airline industry will move quickly to reroute their planes over any area of conflict. This is a complicated move, because a 200-300 mile diversion (or more) means significant fuel costs and operational challenges. Some long haul nonstop flights may now have to land for refueling. In the process, the cost of the flights goes up, crews may have to be repositioned, and flight schedules may not offer connectivity because of the delays. Don’t be surprised to see a “war-risk” or “conflict” fuel surcharge added to the cost of those tickets because of these navigational changes.
除了保險問題之外，此次事故還將產生其他直接影響。例如，航空業很快會更改飛機航線，以避免經過任何衝突區域。這是一項複雜的舉措，因爲繞航200-300英里（或更多）將帶來大量的燃料成本和運營挑戰。部分長途直達航班現在可能需要在中途着陸加油。在這個過程中，航班成本將上漲，乘務人員可能需要重新配置，而且由此產生的航班延誤可能會導致航班之間無法進行直連。鑑於這些航行路線的變化，機票費用中到時可能會增加“戰爭風險”或“衝突區域”燃油附加費，屆時您也不用太驚訝。Historically, commercial airlines have long flown over conflicted areas. As you are reading this, at least 20 U.S. commercial airplanes are overflying Cuba. Airlines flying to Jordan are handled on approach by Israeli air traffic control. Commercial airlines overfly Syria, Somalia, Northern Iraq, to name a few.
從歷史上來看，商業航空公司的飛機經常在衝突地區上空飛行。當你在讀這篇文章時，至少有20架美國商業飛機正飛越古巴上空。飛往約旦的航班是由以色列空中交通管制處理。商業航班仍在敘利亞、索馬里、伊拉克北部等地區上空飛行。During the Vietnam War, Air France had a daily nonstop from Paris to Hanoi. The North Vietnamese knew it. The South Vietnamese knew it. And the U.S. knew it. And that plane was never attacked.
在越南戰爭期間，法國航空公司每天都有從巴黎直飛河內的航班。這一點北越知道，南越知道，美國也知道。但該航班從未遭遇攻擊。But the missile attack that downed MH 17 was a game-changer, and in the risk business, the stakes were just raised stratospherically. The insurance companies that write war-risk policies are now beginning to change their exclusions to add a much wider tract of territory that they now would characterize as a war zone. In doing so, they are putting airlines on notice that—with or without government orders—an airline flying over that zone would be violating the terms of that particular policy. And no airline is going to do risk voiding its coverage.
但馬航MH17航班被導彈擊落這起事故將帶來重大改變，在風險業務方面，此類風險因此次事故而大幅提高。承保戰爭險的保險公司從現在開始將更改其免責條款，將更廣泛的地區定義爲戰區。這樣做也是提請航空公司注意（無論有沒有政府的命令），飛機飛越該區域即違反該保單的條款。而任何一家航空公司都不會以失去保險覆蓋爲代價而以身試險。Meanwhile, at the scene of the crash, the retrieval of the black boxes (the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder) may only have symbolic significance and may have no real constructive role in determining the details of the crash. At this point, assuming they are found intact, not compromised and taken to the appropriate air crash investigation lab, about the only thing the black boxes can contribute is an exact time when the plane was hit with the missile and the aircraft lost electric power.
同時，在墜機現場取回的黑匣子（駕駛艙語音記錄器和飛行數據記錄器）可能只具有象徵意義，在確定墜毀細節方面並不會起到真正的建設性作用。目前，假設黑匣子完好無損，沒有被動過手腳且交由適當的空難調查實驗室處理，則黑匣子能提供的也只有飛機被導彈擊中以及失去電力的確切時間。What’s crucial to the investigators is getting their hands on the fuselage. They need to inspect the metal for definitive signs of striation marks (which would be consistent with chemical explosive, like Semtex, which they quickly discovered on the inside of the fuselage of Pan Am 103) and for the shape of the metal. Twisted out is consistent with an explosion from inside the plane. Twisted in– with burn marks – is consistent with an explosion from outside the plane. Over the next 96 hours, assuming the investigators have unfettered access to the site, they should be able to construct a timeline, and a forensic trail that could give them the chemical DNA they need to lead them back to the missile manufacturer and perhaps even the end-user.
對調查人員而言，機身現場調查是至關重要的。他們要檢查金屬是否有確切的波紋痕跡（波紋痕跡意味着化學品爆炸，如塞姆汀炸藥，當年調查人員在泛美103航班的機身內部很快就發現了這種炸藥）以及金屬機身的形狀。向外扭曲說明是飛機內部爆炸，而向內扭曲並帶有燃燒痕跡則表明是飛機外部爆炸。在未來的96小時內，如果調查人員能夠自由進入事發地點，那麼他們應該能夠確立一個時間表，並獲得相關的法醫線索，而後者可能會給出他們所需的化學品成分，來追溯導彈的製造商，甚至還能查出終端用戶。Then there is the aforementioned chain of custody issue—meaning the issue of proving who supplied the weapon and who fired it. Even if we gain clarity on that in the near term, it does not mean it will be settled in a court of law anytime soon. In the next four days, we should be able to learn conclusively the when, the how and the where of the downing of MH17. We might even soon learn the who. But proving who’s responsible in a court of law, and giving families their due, could easily take years.
待這一過程結束之後，我們將回到之前提到的監管鏈問題，即證明武器的提供方和導彈發射方是誰。即使這個問題在短期內水落石出，也並不意味着問題很快就能在法庭上解決。在未來四天內，我們將確切得知關於MH17航班被擊落的時間、方式和地點。甚至可能很快就會知道元兇是誰。但是，法庭上責任方的判定，以及隨後給予遇難者家屬應有的賠償可能需要耗費數年的時間。
