@ Ian W (25 May 15:25) and related posts:
Certainly the "one agency" only component of the way in which air traffic control and airspace management is handled across international borders as well as over international waters is as Ian W's post has stated it. At the same time, does not this situation call for asking a broader question? Particularly: is the current structure anything like optimum? Taking all the constraints of cost, international relations, and inertia of "the way things have been done for a long time now" into account, does "the System" actually accept this state of affairs as the best that can be done? Obviously by System I mean the web of ICAO (and IATA as well, probably) standards and recommended practices, subject matter MOUs, and presumably other components.
The several well-informed posts on interceptor scramble schemes and related costs seem incontrovertibly dependent for their pertinence on the observation that someone should have recognized the loss of contact sooner. But if the lost contact - and I hate to use a botched-up cliche, but it fits - "fell through the cracks", is it not a fair and reasonable inquiry to say "hey, is this as good as the System can do?", or are we left with, when reduced to simplest terms, a shrug, and an acceptance that this apparent gap in air traffic control and airspace management will be allowed to persist?