EvanB do me a favour: The airline IS technically bankrupt. You start your last post thus: "SAA is not insolvent"... but later add: "SAA may be insolvent but it is not bankrupt" .... Make up your mind.
My Collins dictionary defines bankrupt thus: a person adjudged insolvent by a court, his or her property being transferred to a trustee and administered for the benefit of his creditors 2. any person unable to discharge all his or her debts ...
The dictionary does not distinguish between bankrupt and insolvent.
No one is suggesting that the state is bankrupt and cannot pay SAA's debts. However the entity - SAA - most certainly is. It is a subsidiary of the parent company which, if it chooses, will refinance the debt which SAA is unable to service, hence the request for another R1.6bn!
Now let's move on chaps, this is becoming tedious.