UN's ICAO did not deem Ukranian airspace unsafe

NEW YORK (WABC) -- NATO had recently warned that Russian rebels had acquired longer range surface to air missiles capable of shooting down commercial planes.

So why were Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 and other commercial planes still allowed to fly through this dangerous zone?

The UN's International Civil Aviation Organization, better known as ICAO, governs the skies. When it makes a safety recommendation, countries, airlines listen. Yet despite increasing evidence that sophisticated missile launchers were being used to shoot down Ukrainian military aircraft, ICAO deemed the airspace above safe.

"I actually have flown this route from Amsterdam to Kala Lumpur," said Dale Leppard, a Former Malaysian Airline Pilot.

Dale Leppard once flew that route for Malaysian Airlines. He says the International Civil Aviation Organization is likely going through some deep soul searching about why it had not recommended airspace restrictions.

"I'm quite certain there are quite a few people in ICAO at this very moment who are asking themselves that very question," Leppard said.

In a statement to Eyewitness News, an ICAO spokesman said, ''It is the responsibility of states, not ICAO to issue information on restrictions or potential safety hazards in airspace under their sovereign control."

"Airlines look at ICAO recommendations when deciding where to fly," Leppard said.

The FAA had missed warning signs too having banned flights in April in the Crimean area but not in the airspace above the escalating conflict where Flight 17 was shot down, only extending the ban hours after a missile felled the passenger jet.

A flight tracking website showed how commercial planes are now steering clear of Ukrainian airspace, something these major airlines had already been doing for months despite the added costs.

Meanwhile, aviation regulators are now left with tough questions about how they failed to connect the dots including strong evidence that Russian rebels had missiles that could strike high-altitude aircraft.

"So why was NATO intelligence not cluing in the civilians and telling them, look 32,000 feet is not a safe altitude. There is a question that needs to be asked here because I think there is a real disconnect," said Col. Stephen Ganyard, an ABC News military analyst.