MH17失事之后 世界上什么变了

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.

最新一起马航坠机事件发生后，人们不断地对马航的财务能力、法律责任以及遇难者家属的权利提出了很多问题。

But financial questions aside, there are distinct differences between MH 370 and MH 17.

抛开财务问题暂且不谈，MH370和MH17这两起事故之间有一些显著差异。

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仍是一个谜（而且可能在很长一段时间内都是如此）。从保险赔偿的角度而言，这也是不同寻常的一起事故，因为在缺乏确凿证据的情况下，很难以过失和追责提起诉讼。这可能成为史上赔偿最少的事故之一。

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坠机事故完全不一样。问题不在于是否会提出索赔，而是何时何地提出索赔，将涉及多少名被告。现在已有一大批潜在被告，从马来西亚航空公司（在飞机失事的案例中航空公司肯定是被告）一直到个别政府。还记得泛美航空103航班吗？最后利比亚政府向遇难者家属支付了巨额赔偿金。但考虑到乌克兰目前的形势，此次事故的法律程序可能会变得非常混乱和复杂。

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.

如果遇难者的家属和政府能够证明俄罗斯为乌克兰分裂分子提供了肇事武器（据称客机是被乌克兰分裂分子击落），最终的判决可能会对俄罗斯政府不利（至少在民事诉讼案件中会是这样）。这可能需要几年的时间，而且几乎可以肯定的是，俄罗斯要么上诉，要么干脆无视审判结果。如果出现这种情况，依据先例，至少相关方会试图没收俄罗斯在世界各国的资产。那么哪个国家可能会首先提起诉讼呢？荷兰。可能会出现在没收目标清单上的资产包括俄罗斯航空公司停靠在国外机场的飞机以及停泊在外国港口的俄罗斯游轮。

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.)

在短期内，有关方面将再次依据蒙特利尔公约向遇难者家属进行赔偿。该公约于1999年签订，规定每位遇难者的赔偿数额为174,000美元，而且赔偿金支付不受事故原因（包括战争或恐怖主义）的限制。（此次赔偿金额可能高达4900万美元，而且可能由马来西亚航空的保险公司支付。）

But claimants will most certainly seek more damages. And in this case, one of the claimants will most certainly be Malaysia Airlines itself.

但索赔人肯定会要求更多赔偿。在这种情况下，马来西亚航空公司本身肯定也会提起索赔。

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.

除了保险问题之外，此次事故还将产生其他直接影响。例如，航空业很快会更改飞机航线，以避免经过任何冲突区域。这是一项复杂的举措，因为绕航200-300英里（或更多）将带来大量的燃料成本和运营挑战。部分长途直达航班现在可能需要在中途着陆加油。在这个过程中，航班成本将上涨，乘务人员可能需要重新配置，而且由此产生的航班延误可能会导致航班之间无法进行直连。鉴于这些航行路线的变化，机票费用中到时可能会增加“战争风险”或“冲突区域”燃油附加费，届时您也不用太惊讶。

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.

从历史上来看，商业航空公司的飞机经常在冲突地区上空飞行。当你在读这篇文章时，至少有20架美国商业飞机正飞越古巴上空。飞往约旦的航班是由以色列空中交通管制处理。商业航班仍在叙利亚、索马里、伊拉克北部等地区上空飞行。

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.

在越南战争期间，法国航空公司每天都有从巴黎直飞河内的航班。这一点北越知道，南越知道，美国也知道。但该航班从未遭遇攻击。

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.

但马航MH17航班被导弹击落这起事故将带来重大改变，在风险业务方面，此类风险因此次事故而大幅提高。承保战争险的保险公司从现在开始将更改其免责条款，将更广泛的地区定义为战区。这样做也是提请航空公司注意（无论有没有政府的命令），飞机飞越该区域即违反该保单的条款。而任何一家航空公司都不会以失去保险覆盖为代价而以身试险。

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.

同时，在坠机现场取回的黑匣子（驾驶舱语音记录器和飞行数据记录器）可能只具有象征意义，在确定坠毁细节方面并不会起到真正的建设性作用。目前，假设黑匣子完好无损，没有被动过手脚且交由适当的空难调查实验室处理，则黑匣子能提供的也只有飞机被导弹击中以及失去电力的确切时间。

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.

对调查人员而言，机身现场调查是至关重要的。他们要检查金属是否有确切的波纹痕迹（波纹痕迹意味着化学品爆炸，如塞姆汀炸药，当年调查人员在泛美103航班的机身内部很快就发现了这种炸药）以及金属机身的形状。向外扭曲说明是飞机内部爆炸，而向内扭曲并带有燃烧痕迹则表明是飞机外部爆炸。在未来的96小时内，如果调查人员能够自由进入事发地点，那么他们应该能够确立一个时间表，并获得相关的法医线索，而后者可能会给出他们所需的化学品成分，来追溯导弹的制造商，甚至还能查出终端用户。

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.

待这一过程结束之后，我们将回到之前提到的监管链问题，即证明武器的提供方和导弹发射方是谁。即使这个问题在短期内水落石出，也并不意味着问题很快就能在法庭上解决。在未来四天内，我们将确切得知关于MH17航班被击落的时间、方式和地点。甚至可能很快就会知道元凶是谁。但是，法庭上责任方的判定，以及随后给予遇难者家属应有的赔偿可能需要耗费数年的时间。