Israel begins flying home citizens stranded abroad by Iran conflict
A first aircraft bringing home Israelis stranded abroad by flight cancellations resulting from the conflict with Iran touched down on Wednesday, with returnees expressing relief to be back on Israeli soil.
A statement from the airports authority said "the first flight of Operation Safe Return" landed at Ben Gurion Airport early Wednesday, with national carrier El Al bringing Israelis home from Larnaca in Cyprus.
Transport Minister Miri Regev said on Tuesday that between 100,000 and 150,000 Israelis have been stranded abroad, as Israel and Iran traded deadly fire in their most intense confrontation ever.
Despite the nightly volleys of Iranian missile fire at Israel since Friday, hotelier Yaakov Bogen, 66, said he would rather be at home with family than abroad.
"I belong here, and unfortunately we get used to these fights and war, but we prefer to be here, to support as much as we can," he told AFP in Tel Aviv after landing back in Israel.
Travellers with suitcases disembarked a bus in the coastal hub, after Israel's airports authority urged the public not to order taxis or greet arriving passengers at Ben Gurion Airport due to "the current security situation".
Stylist Tali Gehorsam, 40, expressed relief to be back after her flight was redirected to Cyprus half an hour before landing in the early hours of Friday.
"This is home. There's no other place," she said. "To be overseas and to watch the news is not a nice feeling."
After decades of enmity and a prolonged shadow war, the long-range blitz began on Friday when Israel launched a massive bombing campaign that prompted Iran to respond with missiles and drones.
Since Friday, at least 24 people have been killed in Israel and hundreds wounded, according to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office.
Ori Abadi, a 35-year-old Tel Aviv resident, said he had family in two areas of central Israel that have been hit by recent deadly missile strikes.
"I know that both of the apartments got damaged. It really hurts, it's really worrying and I'm really glad to be with my family now," he said.
Israel's transport ministry said all of Israel's commercial aircraft had been sent abroad to prevent damage during the air war with Iran.
After suspending flights last week, El Al said it was "preparing rescue flights" starting Wednesday with planes departing from Larnaca, Athens, Rome, Milan and Paris.
The low-cost Israeli airline Arkia also announced special flights this week to repatriate Israelis.
A statement from the airports authority said on Wednesday that the return operation "is being managed in stages based on the level of risk and current security assessments, with a strong emphasis on the safety of passengers, aircrews and aircraft".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
28 minutes ago
- The National
US politicians predict Iran will run out of missiles ‘a lot sooner' than Israel
Iran is expected to exhaust its missile supply much sooner than Israel, members of the US Congress told The National on Wednesday, as the Middle East air war entered its sixth day. A long-running shadow war between Israel and Iran erupted into open conflict last week when Israel launched a large‑scale air and covert strike campaign – including Mossad-backed drone operations – against military and nuclear sites in Iran. The attacks killed senior commanders in the country's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and nuclear scientists, and damaged nuclear sites such as Natanz and Isfahan. Israel said its sweeping assault was necessary to prevent Tehran from moving closer to acquiring a nuclear weapon. An Iranian human rights group in Washington said at least 585 people, including 239 civilians, have been killed and more than 1,300 wounded. Iran has fired some 400 missiles and hundreds of drones in retaliatory strikes that have killed at least 24 people in Israel and wounded hundreds. Some have hit apartment buildings in central Israel, causing heavy damage, and air raid sirens have repeatedly forced Israelis to run for shelter. 'It's sort of a war of attrition with missiles for Iran and defence systems for Israel,' said Representative Jimmy Panetta, a Democrat. 'The Iranians are eating up their national resources on impotent responses. Their allies are turning away from them. Russia is not nearly as engaged as it's been in the past. They're alienating individuals in the region who should be their partners and their domestic situation gets worse every day that they drag this out.' 'I don't believe they have the capabilities to continue producing them [missiles] as quickly as they'll need to if they're going to stay in this conflict,' said Mr Panetta. His comments came during a conversation with The National in Abu Dhabi alongside fellow congressmen Brad Schneider, a Democrat, and Republican members Don Bacon and Zach Nunn. All have a military or national security background, with Mr Panetta, Mr Nunn and Mr Bacon having served in the armed forces. 'We saw larger salvos earlier. Now there are only smaller ones, which indicates they're having a hard time getting missiles to the launchers,' said Mr Bacon. 'Some speculate they're also running low, because they're firing far fewer now.' Iran's stockpile of ballistic missiles capable of hitting Israel was estimated to be around 2,000 before Israel launched Operation Rising Lion last Friday, according to Israeli intelligence. US commander General Kenneth McKenzie said in 2022 that Iran had more than 3,000 missiles capable of various ranges. The lawmakers stressed continued US support for Israel's defence and said Iran finds itself today in a "much weaker' position. Potential US involvement Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Wednesday that his country 'will not surrender', in response to remarks made by US President Donald Trump. He also warned that any direct American involvement in Israel's war would lead to 'irreparable' consequences for the US. 'The US President threatens us. With his absurd rhetoric, he demands that the Iranian people surrender to him. They should make threats against those who are afraid of being threatened,' he said in a televised speech. Mr Trump had earlier cautioned Iran that any attacks on US interest in the region would be met with 'the full strength and might' of the American military. 'We've made it clear: if there are attacks on American assets – especially the 40,000 troops we have in the region – we will respond in any way necessary to defend ourselves and our men and women in uniform,' said Mr Panetta. Trump limits Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, a member of the Senate armed services and foreign relations committees, introduced on Monday a bill that would block Mr Trump from using the American military in a conflict against Iran without explicit authorisation from Congress. Mr Nunn has reservations about restricting presidential powers. 'I don't want to put handcuffs on the President when he is trying to be in the best possible position to defend US interests,' he said. 'We're working together with 47 other members on a compendium of maximum pressure sanctions against Iran that the President can leverage immediately with Congress's backing, not only to push Iran to de-escalate but also to apply pressure where necessary.' The members of Congress said diplomacy remains a preferred option, emphasising that there is still a window for a nuclear deal. Since April, the US and Iran have held five rounds of negotiations in Rome and Muscat. The talks aimed to contain Iran's nuclear advances and prevent a regional confrontation, with both sides signalling cautious optimism. A sixth round was scheduled to take place last Sunday. However, two days earlier, Israel launched what it called 'pre-emptive' strikes against Tehran. Mr Trump had given Iran a 60-day deadline to reach a deal or face severe repercussions. Israel's operation began at dawn on day 61. Asked about whether the war amounts to an attempt to force regime change in Tehran, the politicians responded, 'That's going to be up to the people of Iran.' Degraded proxies Although the Iranians are at their weakest point in decades, their nuclear programme is at its strongest in decades, the congressmen said. 'According to the people we've been listening to, they know Khamenei made a decision to develop a nuclear weapon. So the Israelis said, 'We can't wait any longer,'' said Mr Schneider. Last week, the UN nuclear watchdog 's 35-nation board of governors declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for the first time in almost 20 years. A central issue was Iran's failure to provide the International Atomic Energy Agency with credible explanations of how uranium traces detected at undeclared sites in Iran came to be there despite the agency having investigated the issue for years. Iran insists its programme is for civilian purposes and that it does not seek a nuclear bomb. Politicians believe that with many of its proxy groups degraded, Iran now sees nuclear weapons as its last reliable deterrent. Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza have both suffered severe losses in wars with Israel. The Houthis in Yemen have also faced setbacks: US-led strikes have halved their offensive capabilities. The regime of former Syrian president Bashar Al Assad – once a critical partner in Iran's regional axis – was toppled last year. 'Their only deterrent now would be their nukes,' said Mr Panetta. The House members said that Iran's proxies are incapable of offering meaningful defence. 'Whether or not they choose to act is going to be at their own risk – with consequences,' added Mr Panetta. Abraham Accords Mr Schneider said that the 'path to a more secure, prosperous and peaceful Middle East is through the Abraham Accords', referring to a series of normalisation agreements signed in 2020 between Israel and several Arab countries. Before the Gaza war erupted in October 2023, Saudi Arabia was in advanced talks to join the Abraham Accords and normalise relations with Israel, in a deal mediated by the US. However, the war and Israel's military campaign in Gaza halted the momentum, with Riyadh publicly emphasising the need for a credible path towards a Palestinian state before moving forward. 'We're not going to have a decision tomorrow on what happens in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank,' said Mr Nunn. 'But what we do know is there was great economic opportunity and greater security through peaceful relations. There's a mutual threat coming from Iran. And every time Iran fires off a weapon, it goes over Iraq, Jordan, Syria and others, posing a mutual risk.'
The National
an hour ago
- The National
'I may do it, I may not': Donald Trump ambiguous over US involvement in strikes on Iran
President Donald Trump on Wednesday sounded an ambiguous tone over whether the US would strike Iranian nuclear sites and said Tehran had made contact in a bid to negotiate. His comments come a day after he appeared to be preparing for war and demanded the 'unconditional surrender' of the Iranian government. 'You don't know. I may do it, I may not do it – I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do,' Mr Trump said at the White House during a ceremony installing a new flagpole. He said Iranian officials wanted to negotiate and had even proposed a meeting in the White House, but that it was 'very late to be talking'. He added: 'There's a big difference between now and a week ago, right? Big difference." Iran's mission to the UN denied having asked for a meeting with the White House. 'No Iranian official has ever asked to grovel at the gates of the White House,' the mission wrote on X. 'Iran does NOT negotiate under duress, shall NOT accept peace under duress, and certainly NOT with a has-been warmonger clinging to relevance.' The escalation comes on the sixth day of the Iran-Israel air war that threatens to destabilise the entire Middle East. Mr Trump, who campaigned on a promise to bring peace to the world, had been in the process of advancing talks with Tehran that were aimed at limiting Iran's nuclear programme. But a sixth round of discussions scheduled for Oman on Sunday were cancelled after Israel launched air strikes on Iran on Friday. On Tuesday, Mr Trump said America's patience was 'wearing thin' and held a meeting with his national security team to discuss options that included joining Israel in striking Iranian nuclear sites. 'Two very simple words: unconditional surrender,' Mr Trump repeated on Wednesday. 'That means I've had it. OK, I've had it, I give up. No more. Then we go blow up all the ... nuclear stuff that's all over the place there.' The possibility of US involvement in yet another potentially prolonged war in the Middle East comes as Mr Trump appears to have quieted the dissenting voices of his staunchly anti-war and isolationist Maga base. Asked whether he had spoken with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Mr Trump said: 'He's doing a good job, he has been treated very unfairly. There's a wartime president and he's going through this nonsense, ridiculous.'
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel attacks Iran: Will Gulf states lead or be left behind?
By all indications, the Middle East stands at an inflection point. For more than a decade, the US has tried to step back from its historical role as the region's principal powerbroker, seeking to shift its strategic focus to Asia. Since former President Barack Obama's 'pivot', every administration has made gestures towards disengagement - only to be pulled back in by crises, some of which they neither initiated nor fully controlled. But the beginning of President Donald Trump's second term carried a real chance for strategic disengagement. The Trump administration's purging of neoconservatives and doubling down on 'America First' gave the Gulf states a clear signal: Washington was stepping aside. For once, they had to step up - not just as financiers of regional order, but as strategic architects. To their credit, the Gulf states - particularly Qatar, Oman and Saudi Arabia - rose to the occasion. In coordination with Trump's Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, they worked steadily towards a new nuclear framework with Tehran. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The outlines of a regional detente began to take shape. The Gulf states thought they were transitioning from sponsors to strategists, drawing up plans for economic entanglement and integration. This could have become the Middle East's 'end of history' moment - a soft-power-driven, non-hegemonic order rooted in interdependence. But that vision failed to reckon with one crucial actor: Israel. Dramatic escalation Since the Hamas attack on 7 October 2023, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reversed a long-standing strategic posture. From 'mowing the lawn' with calculated, periodic strikes, Israel has transformed into a chainsaw operator: disruptive, maximalist and ideologically rigid. While a decisive victory in Gaza remains elusive, Israel has successfully fought Hezbollah to a standstill and degraded its leadership structure. Flush with these tactical wins, Netanyahu has now escalated dramatically, initiating strikes deep inside Iran. His ambition: to force regime change and pre-empt a negotiated settlement between Washington and Tehran. Netanyahu's calculus is deeply personal and political. With Gulf-backed diplomacy gaining momentum and anti-Iran hawks pushed out of Washington, the Israeli prime minister feared that his influence was waning. Israel, a destructive hegemon, is effective at degrading its foes, but lacks the will, legitimacy and capacity to build anything durable in their place By initiating a high-stakes confrontation, he has not only reasserted his relevance, but also sought to corner Trump into a potentially long, destabilising conflict - thus killing the Iran deal before it could materialise. At its core, strategy is about creating power or influence with the means available to you. It's about reshaping your environment to reflect your interests. The Gulf states have both the means and the moment. But they are hesitating. In many ways, the Gulf states find themselves in a situation reminiscent of the 1973 oil crisis, when Riyadh used oil as a geopolitical weapon to reshape American foreign policy. Today, the Gulf states enjoy far greater entanglements in the financial, energy and diplomatic realms. But while they have succeeded in translating these entanglements into global influence, they remain reluctant to wield them to shape Washington's regional posture. Despite having substantial leverage - ranging from ties with Iran, to influence over actors like the Houthis or even Hamas - the Gulf states continue to prefer soft, transactional statecraft. Courting Trump with investment deals or energy alignment is no match for Israel's coercive diplomacy and military brinkmanship. Regional transformation Israel, by contrast, has maximised the tools at its disposal - military technological superiority, an intelligence edge, and influence and information operations - to set the terms of Washington's Middle East policy. That these moves run counter to long-term US interests seems immaterial. Netanyahu, who since the 1980s has been a vocal neoconservative advocate for drawing the US into military interventions in Iraq and Iran, is not interested in inclusive regional stability. He wants to dictate a regional transformation according to an Israeli interpretation of friend and foe. His regime change fantasies appear now finally within reach. But Iran is not Iraq. Neither the US nor Israel is likely to put boots on the ground. Instead, what's emerging is a long-term strategy of degradation - hollowing out the Islamic Republic, one missile and air strike at a time. Assassinating Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei would set in motion a potentially long and contested succession crisis. The endgame may be a military-industrial dictatorship dominated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), or a failed state where power remains concentrated in a besieged Tehran. Israel could retreat behind its buffers in Jordan and Iraq, while the Gulf states would inherit the instability to come. The Gulf would be left next to a broken neighbour with porous borders and contested sovereignty, and full of armed networks operating, as they have for decades, almost autonomously - networks that would not disappear, but reconstitute as fragmented nodes of resistance, trading arms and ideology in equal measure. Indeed, the greatest irony may be that by trying to eliminate the state behind the IRGC, Israel will only make the IRGC more ungovernable. Emerging order The Shia Islamist militant networks predate the Islamic Republic, having operated in the Lebanese Civil War before the Iranian Revolution. Stripped of a central authority, these networks will adapt and mutate, becoming less accountable and less deterrable. The emerging regional order will be one without balance. Israel, a destructive hegemon, is effective at degrading its foes, but lacks the will, legitimacy and capacity to build anything durable in their place. The Gulf, meanwhile, will remain surrounded by hostile non-state actors - Hezbollah, the Houthis and various Iranian paramilitary groups - now decoupled from Tehran, but no less lethal. Occasional containment strikes by Israel may limit their capacity, but the region will be unlikely to reach an equilibrium of stability. Worse still, Israel's trajectory under Netanyahu is taking the state towards a Jewish fundamentalism that is increasingly isolationist, belligerent and indifferent to the interests of its Arab neighbours - let alone the Palestinians it occupies. Such a state is ill-suited to be a pillar of any consensual regional order. Instead, it acts as a strategic wrecking ball: shattering balances, but incapable of setting new ones. Why Israel's attacks are backfiring as Iranians rally around the flag Read More » Amid this backdrop, the Gulf states must embrace their role as strategic players, not just financiers. This means transforming their influence into leverage. They should not only rebuild the Gulf lobby in Washington to represent their interests, but also actively coordinate pressure on the Trump administration to re-engage with diplomacy, not escalation. A Qatari-Omani diplomatic bridge between the Trump administration and Tehran appears to be already in the making. Secondly, they must draw on their diverse geopolitical partnerships. A multipolar world gives the Gulf states options outside of Washington. China and Russia may not replace the US, but their growing footprint allows for hedging strategies. Aligning more closely with Beijing on economic integration, or with Moscow on security dialogues, creates external pressure on the US to take Gulf concerns more seriously. Finally, the Gulf states must recognise that they are indispensable not just financially or diplomatically, but also strategically. They sit at the centre of energy, trade, and the geo-strategic buffer zone between the Global East and West, as well as North and South. Their ability to mediate, to finance peace, to engage adversaries, and to balance great powers is unique. But they need to develop the confidence to use this power. The Gulf has a choice. It can rise to shape the future of the Middle East - or be left cleaning up its ruins. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
