Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Hong Kong-Taiwan Air Services Talks Collapse  
User currently offlineHkg82 From Hong Kong, joined Apr 2002, 1331 posts, RR: 1
Posted (14 years 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2520 times:

Unfortunately, air services discussions between Hong Kong & Taiwan were unsuccessful, as both sides were unable agree on a new deal. Taiwan insisted that Chang Kuo-cheng, head of the Civil Aeronautics Administration (of Taiwan), CAA, should sign & preside, amongst others, over the new agreement. However Beijing saw this as a sign of independence on Taiwan's part & rejected Taiwan's offer.

The negotiations are complicated because there is no government-to-government contact between Hong Kong & Taiwan, as such, the airlines are left by themselves to discuss on a new air pact, and the big carriers Cathay Pacific & China Airlines are hesitant on letting the smaller airlines fly to Taiwan or add more flights.

More information can be found below.

I hope a new deal is reached before the extension expires on June 30, but there's no way they won't agree on something, otherwise all flights between Hong Kong and Taiwan will stop. That's a recipe for disaster.



27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
User currently offlineChiawei From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 977 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (14 years 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2406 times:

As soon as the barbarian on the other side realize that Taiwan is an independent country, all issues would then be solved.

User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (14 years 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2391 times:

Well, lets just stop all flights between Hong Kong and Taiwan, then they will be happy.....NOT !!. Lets give all flights to Macau and see the aiport so over loaded it would have to shut down on day one !!


What are you talking about ??

User currently offlineN949WP From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 1437 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (14 years 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2376 times:

For years (including the British-rule days in HK), the air services agreement between HK and Taiwan has been strictly between the airlines, with governments playing strictly behind-the-scene roles. All sides knew the trickiness of the political situation and the commercial stakes involved than to start playing political games. If the reports are true about how the Taiwanese government wants to stick their noses into these affairs, then it is quite obvious as to who is muddying the waters.

Squabbling aside, common sense, or more accurately - business sense will prevail, and the politicians will have to shut up. The HK-route is perhaps the biggest cash cow for China Airlines and likely accounts for many jobs in Taiwan, and no Taiwanese politician would dare touch that, especially with the economy in a slump.


User currently offlineA380 From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 658 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (14 years 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2366 times:

The commercial stakes are just too big to ignore, nobody really dare to push it to the limit, I am very sure of that. The politicians squabble because it's basically what they exist for Big grin

User currently offlineJiml1126 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (14 years 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2354 times:

This rounds 'collapse' talk is due to Cathay Pacific has announced that they'll retain 33x weekly freighter flights from the original proposed 45x. This cause a big headache to Taiwan as Taiwan will be forced to reduce flights to HK if CX go ahead Cargo flight reduction.

Cathay Pacific say they'll give up addition 12 slots for cargo flights within 5 minutes when the meeting starts.

Dragonair is shocked at Cathay's proposal.

User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (14 years 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2355 times:


I don't understand what you are saying. Cathay want to cut their freight flights and that means CI have to cut theirs.

WHY ??

User currently offlineCXCPA From Hong Kong, joined May 2000, 387 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (14 years 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2347 times:

It is not possible that we treat Taiwan as an independent country, including Taiwanese! According to the law of both Taiwan and mainland, Taiwan is a part of China! It is good that no flight between HK and Taiwan because the economy of Taiwan will worser and worser. Bow, Taiwan want others to treat them as an independent country, so the negotiation between Macau/mainland China and Taiwan is not possible. As result, no contact between Taiwan and China! Taiwan will collapse soon!  Smile  Smile

On the other hand, CX will have financial problem.  Sad  Sad

User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (14 years 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2331 times:


Any air services agreement between Taiwan and HKG -should- be signed by the appropriate ministers of either side. The problem is BEIJING, *not Taiwan*, sticking it's nose into these matters.

Let's take a walk down memory lane, shall we?
Isnt the HKG SAR -supposed to be- a region with it's own legal autonomy and means to negotiate such matters on it's own? Wasn't that part of the pre-1997 world that was agreed to by the UK and the PRC?
If so, then what's happened to it?

Is this yet another example of the 1 Country/2 systems being proven for the hogwash it is. It's rapidly becoming a 1 Country/1 System situation and if anyone is foolish to feel otherwise, I can provide plenty of evidence in recent times pointing precisely at that. I think we're generally an informed group here, so hopefully I dont have to launch into an Airbus/Boeing type of subsidy exposure battle to prove this point. So, getting to the point: Who is it that is sticking it's nose into HKG's affairs? It's Beijing.

Beijing is the one that is insisting as low-low level as possible official sign the agreement, as part of it's ongoing effort to completely wipe out any recognition that Taiwan is a self governing, democratic island.
Ohh, the words "self-governing, democratic island"!

That's "evil" and "meddlesome" in the 21s century-speak isnt it?

Why, it might "muddy" our access to slave-rate labor in China for products sold at Walmart and KMart!! Heavens we cant ever speak up against that! We must bow to Beijing and thank them for not punishing us.

Taiwan is simply standing up for itself and wanting to have the correct goverment agencies and people charged with responsibility to sign an air service agreement. Taiwan has --every right-- to stand up for it's dignity. If these talks totally collapse and air service in the TWN-HKG stops, send your thank-you notes to Beijing.

In other words: (for those still "challenged" understanding this point) If the US Transportation Department were to sign a new US-UK air services agreement, would you expect President Bush to send a Mobil gas station attendant to sign the treaty and represent the US side instead of Norm Mineta? That's precisely in spirit what Beijing wants Taiwan to do. To bow, spit upon one-self and then kow-tow to more ham-fisted demands from Beijing.

Chiawei said it right. They -are- barbarians. They are proving it well too. So to borrow and use a frequently used Chi-Com mantra:

Why does Beijing have to involve itself in Hong Kong SAR and Taiwan "internal affairs"?  Big grin

I'm frankly sick of Beijing's attitude. I dare say that 23 million Taiwanese are too.


User currently offlineJesseycy From New Zealand, joined Aug 2001, 343 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (14 years 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2325 times:

CXCPA, please don't do political on this forum. I think there are other forums on the net for these sort of stuff..... I'm sure these will be resolved, no airline, no territory will be stupid enough to let this collapse.......

User currently offlineN949WP From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2000, 1437 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (14 years 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2326 times:

Those who want to start talking politics, please be civilized enough to take them to the Non-aviation forum. That's the place to start political flame wars, not here.


User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (14 years 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2316 times:


Your 100% correct on that one.

User currently offlineHkg82 From Hong Kong, joined Apr 2002, 1331 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (14 years 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2320 times:

Thanks for the replies everyone. But, please, no political discussions here. There is a great deal of politics involved in the HK-Taiwan air services talks, but this is not the place for politics. Go to the non-aviation forum for discussing the political issues.

It is inconceivable that they won't reach a consensus or (hopefully) a new pact before the June 30 deadline. Macau Airport won't be able to handle all the traffic, and routing the passengers & cargo via other airports isn't practical.

As a matter of fact in the SCMP Business Post today, it was said that the talks will continue until an agreement is reached.


User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (14 years 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2286 times:

Politics are the reason -why- this air services agreement is being stalled and played around with. To aspire for the lofty intention of "no politics" in this forum, please, give me a break, Politics are simply a fact of life in any sort of thing, be they commercial air services agreements or not. To deny such is childish.

Furthermore, if we want to engage in "hair-splitting", then why wasn't this topic begun in the Non-aviation forum to begin with?! We all know that politics is the major issue behind all of the problems in this matter, denying it would then render the discussion point to a simple sentence: "HKG and Taiwan wont be destinations of each other anymore, we cant discuss why because some one will be offended and..we cant even say why they will be offended..." Period, end of discussion.

Good -Frigging- Grief!! That's as far as it should go in discussion? This matter is a governmentally regulated commercial aviation issue that is **totally colored** -BY- politics. Whether you like that fact or not! You cannot seperate this fact *whatsoever* in this matter. You should have thought about that before the original post was made here! You get opinions on this matter and get discussion on this matter, but you wish to avoid discussing the very core issue at the heart of this matter?

Has anyone ever watched dogs chase their tails? I'm about to stand up and run around my chair here to simulate it.

My Two NT$

User currently offlineJiml1126 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (14 years 3 weeks ago) and read 2281 times:

Hkgspotter1, here's why.

According to UDN News.

It's just saying because the difference for both side's needs is hugely different, Taiwan has to cut the flights in order to match CX's flight deduction. This only happens to cargo.

Meanwhile, EVA will be using a mix of 744 and 74E from July 1, and increasing TPE-HKG from 16x weekly to 49x. It'll be the only Taiwanese airline to serve both Macau and Hong Kong.

User currently offlineHkg82 From Hong Kong, joined Apr 2002, 1331 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (14 years 3 weeks ago) and read 2296 times:

My intention was to focus on the aviation aspects of this issue (meeting the deadline, airline-to-airline discussions, no. of flights between Hong Kong & Taiwan, etc.), which is why I posted this in the aviation forum. Look at Hkgspotter1's post, it's got nothing to do with politics.

Yes, the whole political situation & deadlock between China & Taiwan is the main reason for the failure in the talks, but what I'm trying to say is that if you want to talk about politics, then simply go to the non-aviation forum and post a new topic, or join an ongoing discussion about this (if there is one). We're not in denial, but simply following the rules.

Everyone know it's all about politics!!


User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (14 years 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2272 times:

As long as we acknowledge that indeed, it's the typical dose of politics that are coloring this mess then we can look at it for what it is.

Furthermore, moving this to another forum to discuss the political aspects of it will only clog bandwidth and unnecessarily force one to jump from one forum to another and hopelessly "discuss" it. We cant seperate the politics from this. It's all part of that, I think Johan understands that and is well within the aspects of being a civil aviation discussion. We see countless discussions on this very forum here from the US-UK Bilateral Aviation talks to Open Skies agreements with various countries. All of those are political, so too are the inevitable Airbus-Vs-Boeing discussions. So, to somehow move this issue to one where we have to parse out seperate discussions focusing only on actual civil aviation matters strictly in one area and then open up for political in the other, is pointless. I dont think Johan iintends that in this, or he must have one hell of a server that can handle such a load. I'm an old hand on this board and I've never seen it become that way at all. The Non-Aviation forum is precisely non aviation subjects. This is an aviation subject that has politics injected right through it's very spine. We cannot deny that, nor should we feel afraid of discussing this. Otherwise, we surrender to the things Orwell wrote about so very well, and that's something I simply refuse to allow: A steamrollering of an active discussion regarding important matters like this.
I know *very* well of the mentality that is beginning to creep up in HKG with regards to anything challenging what the central government there is doing and it's frightening to say the least. That type of molded fright is what we need to cast off of ourselves here.


User currently offlineSpaceman From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 534 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (14 years 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2257 times:

Unfortunately for Taiwan it's political position and economic position are both not as solid as the main land's. In this situation all Taiwan can do is to make an agreement without government involvement. China has done this to Taiwan numerous of times, including the APEC meeting held in Shanghai last year. Taiwan wants to send an government official to represent Taiwan in APEC,but main land did not approve therefore Taiwan did not attend at all!

User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (14 years 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2256 times:


Taiwan is slowly but surely rebounding from last years losses. I dont know what you are hearing where you are, but I am seeing solid evidence of a rebound here on formerly "Isla Formosa".

The problem with China's heavy handedness has been the world community fawning over and -allowing- politicization of various things like APEC meetings to cloud objective input on any issue.

China has been attempting to isolate and strangle Taiwan since it was admitted to the UN. Even for such things as observer status to the World Health Organization, which is a global body that seeks to promote exhcange and education in health matters. The PRC's heavy handed politics has forced denial of Taiwanese doctors and technicians from participating even in observer status to contributing to the eradication of diseases that threaten mankind.

Now can you see how -anal- and reprehensible the lot is in Beijing?!!!

In a time when the world cries for a cure for Aids and Ebola. The proletarians and commisars in Beijing say NO!
Think about that!

China's attitude on the world stage, especially vis-a-vis Taiwan, human rights and any other issue is one where if the keys and stage are given to them to exploit, that is precisely what they will. This now transcends into formerly -easy- air-service agreements that contribute to economic vitality and commerce not just for Taiwanese and Chinese companies, but the rest of Asia, Europe, Latin America, the Middle East and North America.

When these people see fit to play "dirty poker", they need to be defined as the dirty poker players they truly are. Their pedantic territorial claims on Taiwan could also be used against Korea if they wanted to follow true to any historical claim (North -and- South Korea for that matter) as well as Mongolia, yet they dont. But they decide to play this high handed bullsh*t with Taiwan because it's a small island that has been successful!

Can you begin to spell the word -BULLY- yet?

I can, so can 23 million Taiwanese. Taiwan goes to sleep everynight with over 300 Chinese missiles pointed at us. with -nothing- of same offensive capability to reply with. Do you?

The more the light is focused on this, the more the world knows what the PRC is doing, and ergo, embarrassment, Which is a powerful weapon to wield to stop these types of shenanigans. It's about dammn time the world wakes up to this threat and stop pretending it isnt. Didnt we ever learn from the 1930s that this is a recipe for disaster?


User currently offlineMAC_Veteran From Taiwan, joined Jun 1999, 726 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (14 years 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2256 times:

I live not far from the Tainan Science Based Industrial Park in Southern Taiwan.

I see *no* evidence of a letup in construction whatsoever. This Industrial park will closely rival the famed Hsinchu Industrial Park in Northern Taiwan. The Hsinchu Park ladies and gentlemen who are not aware of what that place is, is Taiwan's Silicon Valley. The economic power generated there is simply awesome.

If we are schooled in knowing what goes on at Hsinchu, you will understand just how truly awesome that site is in Taiwan's economic importance.

Now we have Construction of Taiwan's SECOND type of park. This park is well over 3/4 complete. The Taiwan High Speed Rail Project is underway right through my village as well. Infrastructure is becoming easier, with Taiwan's second North/South Highway Project also well underway just to my north and east, with a major spur from Tainan south to Pingtung county already complete.

These speak volumes of the true economic vitality that exist here.


User currently offlineSpaceman From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 534 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (14 years 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

Yes that is great but for certain political reason which is not helping the economy.

User currently offlineAir Taiwan From Australia, joined Dec 1999, 1519 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (14 years 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2239 times:

Yes the HKG-TWN air services negotiation is all about politics. I don't think I have to repeat what MAC said about the Beijing's intentions to reduce this to a non-government matter (thus ignoring the fact that the ROC-Taiwan is an independent country). It is quite clear.

However, what was reported on udnnew.com was suggesting that it was CX who has broke the discussion. Hell, even Dragonair is astonished by it.

Normally, this is what happens when negotiating an air-pack. Taiwan and HK both hold undertable talks about the number of flights, the aircrafts used, they talk about everything. And when something is agreed upon, they then stage a "official negotiation", with both sides knowing exactly what will happen.

But in this case, Cathay somehow went against what they proposed initially, and thus the negotiation broke off.


User currently offlineJiml1126 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (14 years 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2234 times:

This is getting complicated as Taiwan's Far Eastern Air Transport wants to fly Taiwan-HK. http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/821543/

User currently offlineCXCPA From Hong Kong, joined May 2000, 387 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (14 years 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2229 times:

Here is the translation of the passage from UDN news posted by Jiml1126:
'Apart from the structure of the air transport serivice contract, there are another reason to cause the halt of the negotiation. Cathay Pacific rejected the previous increasing flights suggestion accepted by both sides before! Cathay Pacific want to cancel the increase of the cargo flights which is agreed by Cathay Pacific before! So that the increasement of the Hong Kong's flight is 33, not 45. Because of the great difference between both sides' demand, Taiwan need to reduce the increasement of flights. So the negotiation broke.'

If this is true, Cathay Pacific is really............................................

Let see how Cathay Pacific makes trouble themselves. HA! HA!

User currently offlineJiml1126 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (14 years 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2204 times:

CX will still have certain shares if it decides to frequency reducting.

Also, it'll be the cargo flight be affected.

25 Hkgspotter1 : CXCPA, Why do you have that username when you HATE CX ??
26 CXCPA : Hkgspotter1, I do not hate CX. I just want CX to make improvement! Now, CX always make strange/wrong decisions.
27 Singapore_Air : Please! Let CXCPA express his own personal views.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Hong Kong Airlines Eyes Services To Major Mainland posted Mon Jan 8 2007 02:34:53 by Carnoc
Mauritius (Port Louis)-Hong Kong On Air Mauritius posted Thu Jan 4 2001 11:55:52 by Ryaneverest
Hong Kong Air Title Change Again? posted Fri Dec 22 2006 09:00:57 by Cloudyapple
CR Airways (N8) Will Be Renamed Hong Kong Air posted Fri Oct 27 2006 10:26:49 by YLWbased
Air Canada Launches Hong Kong Freight Service posted Wed Oct 5 2005 18:45:55 by Hkg82
Air India To Add Bangkok To Hong Kong Service posted Sat Mar 12 2005 19:35:12 by B747-437B
Air Hong Kong: First A300-600F General Freighter posted Tue Sep 28 2004 23:03:44 by FJWH
Air Hong Kong Takes Delivery Of First A300F posted Sun Sep 12 2004 07:08:32 by RobK
Air Bridge Cargo To Hong Kong? posted Tue Jun 1 2004 15:10:35 by N754PR
Cathay Pacific Cargo And Air Hong Kong Query posted Sun Mar 21 2004 11:37:37 by Airmale