THE volatile politics of the Middle East have disrupted travel to that region for countless travelers. But for one man they also prevented travel between two places seemingly far removed from such turmoil: New York and London. And according to the United States Department of Transportation (DoT), that constituted unlawful discrimination on the part of the airline.
In 2013, an Israeli citizen named Eldad Gatt tried to book a flight from New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport to London’s Heathrow on Kuwait Airways. But the airline’s booking system didn’t allow him to purchase the ticket after he entered his Israeli passport information. That’s because Kuwaiti law prohibits its citizens from entering "into an agreement, personally or indirectly, with entities or persons residing in Israel, or with Israeli citizenship,” according to the airline.
The DoT initially decided that Kuwait Airways hadn’t unlawfully discriminated against Mr Gatt. But after the Israeli appealed that ruling, it conducted a further review and reversed its decision. In a letter to Kuwait Airways’ lawyer last week, a DoT official wrote that the airline “unreasonably discriminated against Mr. Gatt ... by refusing to sell him a ticket on its flight from JFK to LHR.”
There seems little question that the DoT’s second finding was the correct one; that barring a passenger from a flight on the basis of his nationality is a clear violation of America’s anti-discrimination laws. The letter cites a plethora of case history, dating as far back as the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887, which forbids transit carriers from giving “any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person,” as well as Supreme Court rulings against racial discrimination.
But, in some ways, this case is thornier than those precedents. The Arab League has organized a boycott of Israel since before Israel was even a country. Not only do many nations exclude Israeli citizens from entering, nearly a dozen will also bar those from other countries who have an Israeli stamp in their passports. Companies like Kuwait Airways didn’t make these policies, but they are often bound by them. The DoT writes that the airline should have understood America’s anti-discrimination laws when it accepted its foreign air carrier permit in 2011. But it also faces potential penalties from its home government. Violations of the Kuwaiti law banning deals with Israelis can lead to imprisonment with hard labour, the airline told the investigation. That, says the DoT, “is not a proper justification for the denial of transportation as the penalties that allegedly have compelled [Kuwait Airways’] conduct are part of a discriminatory statutory scheme.”
Will other Middle Eastern carriers get caught up in this? It depends. Although the United Arab Emirates, for example, also blacklists those with Israeli passports, they are not barred from flying with its two big airlines, Emirates and Etihad. Indeed, last year Etihad took to social media to dispel a report in the New York Post that the carrier was discriminating against Israelis, saying it had, in fact, flown 1,000 of them in 2013. However, less tolerant Gulf airlines, including Saudi Arabian Airways, may be in the DoT’s sights; as the Kuwait Airways spat shows, travellers don’t need to be going to, from, or through the Middle East to get caught up in the controversy.
The DoT has given Kuwait Airways 15 days to respond to its ruling with an outline of the steps it will take to comply with US law for the route. If it can’t find a way to satisfy the laws of both Kuwait and the United States, a flight between New York and London could be lost.
