AACO Calls for Arab Airline Cooperation Amid Airport Attacks

By Sophie Lindqvist

AACO’s annual general meeting (AGM) chairman, al-Khater, condemned all attacks on airports and civil aircraft across the Arab region. He said protecting those facilities and the people using them is a collective responsibility without double standards.

The statement, delivered on behalf of the Arab Air Carriers Organization (AACO), links safety to operational continuity. It gives no attack count, date, location, or disruption statistics, so the reported impact remains unquantified.

Why does cooperation matter for flight continuity?

Al-Khater said the recent period showed why Arab co-operation and integration matter. Arab airlines took the initiative to coordinate, exchange support, and work jointly on practical solutions during exceptional circumstances.

Those efforts aimed to ensure the continuity of operations as much as possible. The wording acknowledges limits: the statement describes a goal under severe conditions, not a guarantee that schedules or services stayed normal.

Arab carrier efforts were complemented by facilities provided by relevant authorities in the region. Al-Khater said those facilities directly supported operations and maintained a smooth flow of air traffic despite security and operational complexities.

The report does not identify the authorities, airports, or facilities involved. The statement does not name participating carriers, although the item carries a Qatar Airways AGM/AACO label.

What must change in the protection of civil aviation?

He said civil aviation and its safety “must remain insulated from political conflicts and disputes.” In practical terms, the statement separates the safety and continuity of civil infrastructure from the political disputes surrounding the region.

Al-Khater also called the protection of civil aviation infrastructure “not the concern of any single state,” instead describing it as a collective responsibility of the international community. He rejected selectivity or double standards regardless of the reasons or justifications offered.

He said this responsibility extends to airports, civil aircraft, passengers, and personnel. The breadth matters because the statement treats disruption anywhere in the aviation system as a shared international issue, rather than as isolated national incidents.

The chairman said the attacks had caused casualties, damage, and disruption to air transport operations. The report provides no breakdown by country, operator, or incident, and does not connect the disruption to specific capacity or schedule losses.

What does the sector’s outlook mean for growth?

Al-Khater expressed optimism and confidence despite the challenges and crises the region has faced. He linked that view to aviation’s history of resilience and adaptability: its ability to manage crises efficiently and plan for continued growth and investment in available opportunities while a crisis is still unfolding.

His case extends beyond survival. He said flexibility had enabled airlines to provide better services for passengers and shippers and helped aviation remain a key driver of economic development and regional and international connectivity.

The report supports that as an institutional view, not measured proof. It provides no traffic, cost, or financial data to size the effect, and names no routes or projects.

What does this change for airlines and passengers?

For airlines, the message makes cooperation a stated part of crisis response. Coordinating with peers, sharing support, and using facilities provided by authorities can preserve more of the network when security conditions constrain individual operators.

It does not create a new safety certificate, regulatory approval, compensation scheme, or service guarantee. No individual regulator is identified, so the report cannot establish any aircraft-level or regulatory consequence.

For passengers and shippers, the practical commitment is protection plus continuity, not quantified assurances about schedules or capacity (the volume of flights or seats airlines can offer). The statement identifies who must cooperate but not how compliance will be measured.

That leaves relevant authorities and airlines to translate the principle into security, contingency, and air-traffic arrangements. The source does not describe enforcement, funding, or an incident-response mechanism.

The next test is whether coordinated airline support and authority-provided facilities can maintain air traffic during another crisis without allowing political disputes to compromise civil aviation safety.