Return strategy and timing

[abcdefg]

Quote

@abcdefg hope this beef doesn't affect you in the long-term. Do keep us updated!

 

It does not look good. 

[mungouk]

This (ref. trump dispute) is only direct US-China flights though, right? 

 

Flying via Seoul, Singapore or Bangkok might be feasible in the mid-term, quarantine requirements notwithstanding...?

 

(Myself, I'm hoping to get back to China from the UK before too long. Meanwhile, UK-China relations might be about to take a similar nose-dive...)
 

 

 

[roddy]

I don't know if that headline has changed since you posted it, but the top of the page currently reads:

Quote

China Steps Back in Airline Dispute With the Trump Administration
Beijing will allow limited flights by international carriers to resume after the White House threatened to block Chinese passenger jets from flying to the U.S.

 

[889]

Then you read the details and you see China's made hardly any movement at all.

 

This ain't gonna fly at the White House.

[xinoxanu]

1 hour ago, roddy said:

I don't know if that headline has changed since you posted it

 

Yes, it changed. Also the article's content by the looks of it.

Someone at the NYT must be feeling pretty lazy to not create a new article... or is it lack of hosting resources perhaps? They shouldn't be using a cheap GoDaddy plan at all if that's the case ?

[roddy]

Suspect the intent is to make sure people clicking on links already sent out via email or notifications or whatever are getting to the up-to-date page. Not sure though. 

[xinoxanu]

Perhaps, yes.

 

A little digressing: this is actually a big concern for me, and many others working through a degree, I am sure. This practice is commonplace nowadays in many global newspapers, so when it comes to referencing you can't trust the source to stay static, and support what you are referencing to, anymore. In this day and age, maybe I should start considering referencing through the Wayback Machine...

[abcdefg]

This article from the Washington Post from yesterday (3 June) has another explanation of the main issues. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/trump-administration-bans-flights-by-chinese-airlines/2020/06/03/d5eb7136-a5a5-11ea-b619-3f9133bbb482_story.html 

 

Here are two excerpts, in case you find yourself behind a paywall: 

 

 

Quote

June 3, 2020 at 1:57 p.m. CDT

In a move likely to further inflame tensions between the United States and China, the Trump administration said Wednesday it will ban all commercial passenger flights by Chinese carriers beginning later this month.

The change, announced by the Department of Transportation and beginning June 16, is in response to China's refusal to allow U.S. carriers to resume service to China.

The rule would impact operations of seven carriers, including Air China and China Eastern Airlines. The department noted in its rule filing that the ban could take effect sooner at President Trump's discretion. Still, the June 16 date does give the two sides some time to iron out their differences and avert a ban...

 

Delta and United airlines, however, had hoped to resume flights to China in early June, but U.S. officials said rules imposed by Chinese authorities effectively prevent them from doing so.

 

18 hours ago, mungouk said:

This (ref. trump dispute) is only direct US-China flights though, right? 

 

Flying via Seoul, Singapore or Bangkok might be feasible in the mid-term, quarantine requirements notwithstanding...?

 

(Myself, I'm hoping to get back to China from the UK before too long. Meanwhile, UK-China relations might be about to take a similar nose-dive...)

 

I tried to get back to the China Mainland in July by using a flight to Hong Kong. That was cancelled a few days ago. But perhaps an independent gateway outside of China entirely might be possible in the mid-term, as you say. September or October is what I'm now investigating. 

 

Relations between China and the US are getting less amicable and more tense with every passing day. Since this eventual "opening up" will surely not be a "blanket" thing, but will be tailored to individual countries, passengers from the US might have to wait longer than those from some other countries and regions.  

[Guest realmayo]

If - as seems likely - western democracies are now well into the first year of a Cold War with China, we'll all have to adjust our plans for the future - and be grateful for the years we had when things were easier.

[xinoxanu]

1 hour ago, realmayo said:

the first year of a Cold War with China

 

To be honest: it's about time. 

 

The world has been euro-centric and america-centric for too long, we are no better in the west than a couple decades ago (in fact, when it comes to many things, we are worst) and the rest of the world has been greatly impacted by our selfishness. I can't really say that all the steps that China is taking towards their own "new world order" will be beneficial to all parties (and, obviously, neither the western ones are), but I am intrigued to see where all of this may take us.

 

A good relationship needs balance and so far competition has been a (bad) answer to this. Let's see if levelling the ground translates into some cooperation for a change.

[mungouk]

4 hours ago, abcdefg said:

This article from the Washington Post from yesterday (3 June) has another explanation of the main issues. 

Seems the situation has already moved on...

 

China eases flight curbs after United States targets its carriers (Reuters, June 4)

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-airlines-caac/china-eases-flight-curbs-after-united-states-targets-its-carriers-idUKKBN23B081

 

TL;DR: CAAC is proposing allowing more or fewer flights per airline entering China, depending on whether or not they are carrying infected passengers.