Africa Guardian

Byase Luteke:
The Regional Tourism Organization for Southern Africa (RETOSA) is spot on. At least in theory. This body is rooting for the formation of a SADC airline as one of way of boosting tourism in the region. This clarion call was made by Dr. Bradah Mauganidze, Chairman of the Board of Directors of RETOSA, at a stakeholders meeting which took place in Arusha, Tanzania early March this year. Amongst the impediments against fostering tourism within SADC countries includes visa facilitation and lack of cost effective and efficient transportation. This observation was also echoed by the Minister of Tourism and Natural Resources, Ezekiel Maige who was the guest of honour at this meeting. “This is not a problem of visa alone but also logistics. A tourist visiting Namibia or Angola cannot connect easily to Tanzania and vice versa,” lamented Mr. Maige.
It’s a fact that air transport is very costly in Africa and this is because countries within the continent are not very well connected particularly in terms air transportation. For example, at the moment a passenger can only travel from Dar es Salaam to Lubumbashi (DRC) by flying via Nairobi on Kenya Airways (KQ) or via Johannesburg on South African Airways (SAA) and both alternatives cost an arm and a leg! Had there been directs flights between DAR and Lubumbashi, for a journey which takes less than 3 hours flying time, the cost should not exceed $600 at most, not $1,055 or $1,186 for a return journey on KQ and SAA respectively. Obviously such high fares can only be a deterrent to intra-Africa tourism.
In mooting the SADC airline idea, RETOSA is talking to the converted. This writer has spent most of his professional life working on the regional airline concept but as the adage goes; it’s easier said than done. The African Joint Air Services (AJAS) project was conceptualized basically to address the shortcomings of air transportation in the East and Central African region along the lines suggested by RETOSA. AJAS was a regional airline concept that was initiated by Zambia, Uganda and Tanzania under the auspices of the Preferential Trade Area (PTA) now known as COMESA.
The idea was for these three countries to come together and form one regional airline which would basically take over the international operations of the national airlines namely; Zambia Airways, Uganda Airlines and Air Tanzania. In essence, the national carriers were supposed to confine themselves to domestic and regional operations while AJAS would concentrate on intercontinental flights. In other words the three national airlines were supposed to feed AJAS airlines at the selected “hubs” of Lusaka, Dar es Salaam and Entebbe and vice versa. It was anticipated that AJAS airlines would in this way be able to attain the critical mass necessary to succeed in the international arena unlike the national carriers who were floundering in this area. For example, Uganda Airlines suspended operations to Europe in the late 1980s after its B707 aircraft fatal accident in Rome, Italy while Air Tanzania’s two attempts at intercontinental operations came to naught and Zambia Airways was in dire straits.
Preparatory work on AJAS started in earnest in Lusaka in 1992 but was cut short after the collapse of Zambia Airways under a jungle of debt and consequently Zambia withdrew from the AJAS framework leaving Uganda and Tanzania to pursue the idea. Eventually the project was relocated to Entebbe, Uganda. The AJAS concept came to fruition in 1994 after Transnet of South Africa (a parent company of SAA) came on board and kick-started AJAS trading as Alliance Air in terms of financial and expertise backing.
But alas, this brilliant idea lasted for only five years! The ink on the AJAS shareholders agreement hadn’t even dried when both Uganda Airlines and Air Tanzania started crying wolf alleging that Alliance Air was just a monster whose intention was to kill instead of complementing them. As a result the intended Entebbe-Dar es Salaam-Dubai operations by Alliance Air stalled due to the resistance by the national airlines forcing the latter to operate only the Dar es Salaam-Entebbe-London route. Furthermore both Air Tanzania and Uganda Airline were reluctant to work with Alliance Air in terms of providing the required feeder network. It was quiet clear from the outset that without additional route network Alliance Air would not last. But the last nail in Alliance Air‘s coffin came when Transnet’s attempt to buy Uganda Airlines was scuttled ( by elements within Uganda Airlines) at the eleventh hour and this led to the demise of the lion-tailed airline in October 2000. Ultimately, there were no takers for Uganda Airlines leading to the airline’s liquidation as well.
Although AJAS/Alliance Air operations were short lived, even critics acknowledge that the airline was able to put both Uganda and Tanzania firmly on the international tourism map in a relatively short period. In this regard Alliance Air actively promoted the two countries aboard through the international media such as CNN Traveler Magazine, London Underground Train, London and Berlin Travel Markets and even in far flung places such as Canada and Australia.
Examples abound of other joint airlines which went through a similar fate. Gulf Air (GF), a 60 years old airline, once (or rather was) a beacon of successful joint airlines, failed not long ago. And yet GF had all it takes to excel- money and the market. The former shareholders of GF are who’s who of this world- Abu Dhabi, Oman, Qatar and Bahrain. The rest of the pack except Bahrain went separate ways to form individual national carriers partly due to disillusionment with GF and the desire to pursue nationalist and egoist objectives. East African Airways, once a byword for East African renaissance collapsed in the bigger scheme of the East African Community political fallout. Air Afrique, also a joint airline of a cabal of some West African states crumbled amid acrimony amongst member countries. In fact the only joint venture airline still alive today is the Scandinavian Airline Systems (SAS), co-owned by Sweden, Norway and Denmark.
I have gone into airline joint ventures’ details to underscore the point that sometimes noble and logical causes like the SADC airline idea can get bogged down by parochial and misguided selfish interests. A successful SADC airline should ideally entail all hands on deck and a paradigm shift in the mindset of the national airlines by swallowing their pride and come to terms to the fact that they have to co-exist with the new regional airline. Some airlines especially the weak ones may have to exit the market while others may have to cede certain route rights in favour of SADC airlines so as to give it the critical mass and economies of scale to be able to operate cost effectively and optimally. The SADC airline is desirable and indeed this is the way to go but the reality on the ground is that such good ideas are often fraught with insurmountable problems and can be quite elusive. I am afraid this idea, just like others before, may end up being just a wishful thinking.