US military aircraft no longer visible at base in Qatar
Between June 5 and 19, nearly all of the aircraft visible at the Al Udeid base are no longer anywhere in plain sight, according to images published by Planet Labs PBC and analyzed by AFP.
Nearly 40 military aircraft — including transport planes like the Hercules C-130 and reconnaissance aircraft — were parked on the tarmac on June 5. In an image taken on June 19, only three aircraft are visible.
The US embassy in Qatar announced Thursday that access to the base would be limited 'out of an abundance of caution and in light of ongoing regional hostilities,' and urged personnel to 'exercise increased vigilance.'
The White House says US President Donald Trump will decide sometime in the next two weeks whether to join ally Israel's strikes on Iran. The Islamic republic could then respond by striking US bases in the region.
Mark Schwartz, a former lieutenant general in the US Army and a defense researcher at the Rand Corporation, said the personnel, aircraft and installations at Al Udeid would be 'extremely vulnerable' given its 'close proximity' to Iran.
Schwartz, who served in the Middle East, told AFP that even shrapnel could render the aircraft 'non-mission capable.'
'You want to reduce risk to US forces, both personnel and equipment,' he said.
The planes that have left the tarmac since early June could have been moved to hangars or to other bases in the region.
The US military did not immediately respond to an AFP request for comment.
US forces in the Middle East have been mobilized since Israel's first strikes on Iran nearly a week ago, with an additional aircraft carrier en route and significant aircraft movement.
An AFP analysis of open source data tracking aircraft positioning showed that at least 27 military refueling planes — KC-46A Pegasus and KC-135 Stratotanker planes — traveled from the United States to Europe from June 15-18.
Twenty-five of them were still in Europe as of late Wednesday, with only two returning to American soil, the data showed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rudaw Net
an hour ago
- Rudaw Net
US senator warns PMF bill grants Iran ‘backdoor' into Iraq
Also in Iraq Iraq-Iran new security deal updates 2023 agreement: Security advisor Iraq's water crisis spurs calls to block Turkish companies Eighth batch of Yazidi remains from ISIS genocide laid to rest in Shingal Baghdad nearing oil deal with Erbil, negotiating new export agreement with Ankara A+ A- ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - The controversial bill to restructure the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF, or Hashd al-Shaabi) without prior disarmament is 'ill-advised' and would solidify Iranian influence over Iraq, a US senator said on Wednesday, calling on Baghdad to choose between Tehran and the West. Washington has expressed increasing caution about a potential bill that seeks to organize the Popular Mobilization Commission (PMC) - a government board created to bring the PMF under state control. The bill, which has divided lawmakers, aims to regulate the PMF's structure, salaries, and retirement benefits, a politically sensitive issue given the PMF's central role in Iraq's security framework and the political influence it wields. 'This move would be ill-advised. Integrating Iranian-aligned militias into the Iraqi military, without first requiring them to disarm and demobilize, gives Iran a back door into the Iraqi government to undermine its sovereignty,' Allison Aprahamian, Press Secretary at Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Rudaw in an email, citing a statement from Republican Senator James Risch, of Idaho. He called on Iraq to choose between Tehran and the West, saying, 'This is where the rubber meets the road - Iraq must choose between being held back by Iran or a brighter future with the West.' Although the PMF was officially incorporated into the Iraqi security apparatus and granted formal legal status by parliament in 2016, many of its factions still operate independently, with impunity, and reportedly maintain strong ties to Iran. Some have been involved in attacks on US forces in Iraq and Syria and remain openly hostile to Washington. In late July, an attack by Kataib Hezbollah - a powerful Iran-backed Iraqi militia designated by the US as a Foreign Terrorist Organization and a PMF component - on an agriculture ministry office in Baghdad killed three people. The PMF is composed of various armed factions, including groups designated as terrorist organizations by the US. Among them is Asaib Ahl al-Haq (AAH), whose leader Qais al-Khazali is a senior member of the Shiite-led Coordination Framework, a key component of Iraq's governing coalition. In March, AAH and the State of Law Coalition boycotted a parliamentary session after the PMF bill was excluded from the agenda, forcing its postponement. Rebaz Ali contributed to this report.
Memri
2 hours ago
- Memri
Then-Deputy Of Iran's National Security Council Seyed Hossein Mousavian In 2004 Interview: 'After Iraq's Attacks, We Announced Our Defensive Chemical And Nuclear Programs'
In an October 17, 2004 interview conducted in Tehran with the Swiss paper SonntagsBlick, then Deputy of Iran's National Security Council Seyed Hossein Mousavian told German journalist and Iran expert Bruno Schirra that "after Iraq's attacks, we announced our defensive chemical and nuclear programs." He stressed that Iran's regime will never abandon its right to enrichment of uranium and will defy UN sanctions. "Even if we are dragged before the UN Security Council, that will not change our stance," stressed Mousavian. When asked about former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's call for the construction of "biological and radiological weapons" that, Rafsanjani said, can be used "for defensive, but also offensive use," Mousavian responded that Rafsanjani "only spoke about the defensive." Seyed Hossein Mousavian Separately, Fereydoon Abbasi, former head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said in a May 26, 2025 interview on that "In one of my interviews, I said that we had reached the capability to build a [nuclear] weapon 15-20 years ago, but we had not built it for several reasons."[1] Mousavian was a key architect of the Iranian regime's nuclear program. He served as a spokesman for the atomic negotiations with the European powers that happened from 2003 to 2005. According to an archived 1997 article from the Berlin newspaper Der Tagesspiegel, Abolghasem Mesbahi, a former Iranian intelligence official, told a Berlin court during the Mykonos trial: "Mousavian participated in most of the [Iranian regime's] crimes that took place in Europe."[2] Iranian dissidents have accused Mousavian of playing a crucial role in the assassinations of at least 24 dissidents in Europe, including Iranian Kurds murdered in a joint Iran-Hizbullah operation in the West Berlin restaurant Mykonos in 1992. Mousavian was the Islamic Republic's ambassador to Germany from 1990 to 1997. He served from 1987-1990 as Iran's General Director of the Foreign Ministry for West Europe and has expressed support for Hamas, Hizbullah, and the Islamic regime's fatwa to assassinate the British-American author Salman Rushdie.[3] Mousavian was a researcher at Princeton University until June 2025.[4] According to the Alliance Against Islamic Regime of Iran Apologists (AAIRIA), Princeton University forced Mousavian into retirement. [5] Following is a translation of the SonntagsBlick interview: "After Iraq's Attacks, We Announced Our Defensive Chemical And Nuclear Programs" Bruno Schirra: "Iran is working on mastering the entire nuclear fuel cycle. To build a bomb, all you would need is a political decision." Mousavian: "True. But that applies to all Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) partners. Japan, too, could withdraw from the NPT at any time and build the bomb. Trying to deprive Iran of these contractual rights demonstrates an unacceptable double standard. Especially since we have unconditionally accepted the additional protocol to the NPT." Schirra: "In doing so you are admitting to the possession of chemical weapons. Regarding the nuclear weapons program, Ayatollah Beheshti already stated in 1981 that its goal was the atomic bomb. And your former President Rafsanjani also called for the construction of 'biological and radiological weapons.' Explicitly, 'for defensive, but also offensive use.'" Mousavian: "We have never heard such a statement from Ayatollah Beheshti..." Schirra: "I would be happy to give you the source. And the date of the Friday prayer, at which Ayatollah Beheshti also said it publicly..." Mousavian: "... and Hashemi [Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani] only spoke about the defensive. After Iraq's attacks, we announced our defensive chemical and nuclear programs. We will continue to do so in the future." Schirra: "Chemical and nuclear programs?" Mousavian: "Yes, yes. But only defensive, never offensive." "We Must Be Able To Defend The People Against Nuclear Attacks" Schirra: "So Iran is pursuing a chemical and a nuclear program?" Mousavian: "That's our public policy." Schirra: "Excuse me, but we are talking about weapons!" Mousavian: "We never said we needed to possess chemical and nuclear weapons. Only programs for defense. We must be able to defend the people against nuclear attacks." Schirra: "In Iranian facilities, 37 tons of so-called yellowcake are being converted into uranium hexafluoride. Too little for civilian purposes, but enough for five nuclear bombs." Mousavian: "The 37 tons are for a pilot project in Isfahan, which was under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) supervision from the beginning. We are still in the pilot phase, that is, before production. Incidentally, the conversion of yellowcake is also permitted under the regulations of the NPT." Schirra: "In Isfahan and Natanz, you are working on enrichment. The facility in Arak is intended to produce heavy water. All indications that Iran also has a military nuclear program. Are you working on the bomb?" "We Will Respond In A Way That Will Make Jerusalem Regret It Forever – What Does That Mean? You Will See Then" Mousavian: "Iran has the right to use the technology for peaceful purposes. The danger of a civilian nuclear infrastructure being used for military purposes through a political decision applies, as already mentioned, to every member of the NPT!" Schirra: "The IAEA is demanding an end to uranium enrichment in Iran. Will you accept it?" Mousavian: "We do not accept this ultimatum. It was a political decision by the IAEA. Even if we are dragged before the UN Security Council, that will not change our stance. Dissuading us from this can only be achieved through political discussions, not through ultimatums." Schirra: "Why don't you then ensure international détente and simply comply with the IAEA's ultimatum? You know that Israel is watching your plans with great nervousness." Mousavian: "We will not bow to any ultimatum or resolution. And we are certain that Israel would not dare to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. It does not even have a one percent chance of doing so." Schirra: "And if Israel attacks anyway?" Mousavian: "Then we will respond in a way that will make Jerusalem regret it forever. What does that mean? You will see then." Page one of two of the original German of Mousavian's 2004 interview in SonntagsBlick. Page two of two of the original German of Mousavian's 2004 interview in SonntagsBlick. *Yigal Carmon is Founder and President of MEMRI.
Memri
2 hours ago
- Memri
Russian Media Outlet Iran.ru: 'A Military Crisis Or Increased External Threats Against Iran' Would Have 'Profound' Consequences For China And Russia
On August 5, 2025, the Russian media outlet published an article, titled "Consequences of a Potential Military Conflict with Iran for Russia and China," by Mohammad Hossein Masumzadeh, senior research fellow at the Iran-based Governance and Policy Think Tank (GPTT). The article argues that a military crisis or increased external threats against Iran would have profound and many-sided consequences for both China and Russia. "The loss of a key strategic partner would weaken their regional influence and geopolitical leverage over the West. Key energy and transit routes would be disrupted, instability would grow in neighboring regions, and both countries would face significant threats to their economic interests and security," the article noted. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi (in the center) with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi in Beijing, China, March 14, 2025, during the talks on the Iranian nuclear issue. (Source: the PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs).[2] Below is article:[3] "This Informal But Vital Partnership Is Based On Shared Goals" "The strategic cooperation between Russia, China, and Iran, often referred to by Western powers as the 'axis of instability,' has become an important counterweight to Western influence, especially to the United States. This informal but vital partnership is based on shared goals: countering American unipolarity, protecting national sovereignty, and expanding influence in strategic regions. "Thanks to the country's strategic location and vast energy resources, Iran comes forward as a key element in this axis, serving as a vital ally for Russia and an important energy and transit hub for China. Both Russia and China promote Iran's integration into [international] structures such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and BRICS, perceiving it as a bulwark against Western sanctions. Therefore, provided Iran is drawn into a military conflict or faces increased external threats, especially from the West or as a result of regional conflicts, this could significantly upset the global and regional balance of power, which would have serious consequences for both Russia and China." "Iran Is A 'Key Gateway' For China's Belt And Road Initiative" "A military crisis or growing external threats to Iran could pose significant risks to China's economic and strategic interests. Despite its close economic ties with the West and Israel, China prefers diplomatic and political support for Iran to direct military intervention. Iran plays a key role in ensuring China's energy security, supplying about 90 percent of its exported crude oil to the PRC. In 2025, average supplies [volume] will range from 1.4 to 1.7 million barrels per day (bpd), reaching a peak of 1.8 million bpd in June 2025. "These supplies with a discount, made possible by Western sanctions, are extremely important for China, the world's largest oil importer. A crisis in Iran will disrupt this vital supply chain, prompting China to seek more expensive or less reliable alternatives, which could potentially slow its economic growth. In addition, non-oil trade between Iran and China, which amounted to $32.3 billion in 2024, will face serious restrictions. "Iran is a 'key gateway' for China's Belt and Road Initiative (B&R), facilitating a connection to markets in Europe and West Asia. A military crisis or external threats disrupting Iran's transport and energy corridors would jeopardize China's major infrastructure projects and vital logistics routes to the West. "Events such as Israel's strike on Iranian military and nuclear facilities in June of 2025 could further undermine strategic projects such as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The 'Middle Corridor' (Trans-Caspian International Transport Route), which comes as an alternative to routes running through Iran or Russia, has a number of infrastructure limitations, including limited capacity, making it an unsuitable replacement for Iran within China's Belt and Road Initiative. "Geopolitics-wise, the crisis in Iran would undermine China's diplomatic authority, especially after its successful mediation in Iran and Saudi Arabia rapprochement in March of 2023. It will also jeopardize China's strategic autonomy in securing energy and logistics routes, increasing its vulnerability to external pressure, especially in such narrow points as the Strait of Malacca, which remains under notable US influence. This would weaken China's stance in the region and globally, giving the West an opportunity to strengthen its position and possibly to shift its focus towards a direct confrontation with China." "A Crisis In Iran Will Weaken Russia's Ability To Maintain Its Influence In The Region" "For Russia, a military crisis or external threats targeting Iran would have far-reaching consequences, affecting its geopolitical influence, economic stability, and security interests. A crisis in Iran will weaken Russia's ability to maintain its influence in the region, which could create a power vacuum that rivals such as Turkey or Saudi Arabia could make use of. In the worst-case scenario, under a serious escalation of the conflict, growing instability, inter-ethnic tensions, or a refugee crisis, the situation could spread to Central Asia and the Caucasus, which in turn increases the risks of terrorism, migration, and anti-Russian sentiment in these critically important regions. "Economy-wise, while Russia, being a major oil exporter, may temporarily benefit from an increase in global oil prices due to supply disruptions from Iran, long-term market volatility will undermine OPEC+ cooperation on oil production and price stabilization. Iran is also perceived as a market for Russian arms, and the crisis will likely reduce demand for Russian military exports, which will affect the country's defense industry. In addition, Iran provides Russia with access to Asian markets, in particular India, through [its] transportation corridors. "The International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), which connects Russia, Iran, and India, is a cornerstone of Russia's strategy to diversify trade routes and reduce dependence on routes controlled by the West. The crisis in Iran would threaten feasibility of the INSTC by disrupting Russia's access to markets of the South Asia and exacerbating problems associated with the sanctions over the conflict in Ukraine. A direct conflict involving Iran could further reduce the security of these routes and block Russian exports. "In terms of politics, Iran serves as a geopolitical buffer protecting against Western pressure, especially in the context of the Ukrainian conflict. The crisis in Iran will encourage the West, which could increase Russia's isolation and weaken its rhetoric against Western imperialism." The "Geopolitical Leverages Over The West" "In conclusion, let's note that a military crisis or increased external threats against Iran would have profound and many-sided consequences for both China and Russia. The loss of a key strategic partner would weaken their regional influence and geopolitical leverages over the West. Key energy and transit routes would be disrupted, instability would grow in neighboring regions, and both countries would face significant threats to their economic interests and security. "The 'axis' would be seriously weakened, which will create opportunities for the West to expand its influence. Provided the U.S. manages to deal with the challenge posed by Iran, it will be able to divert resources to a more direct confrontation with China and Russia, wherein Russia will face an additional threat in the form of increased NATO pressure, especially in the context of resumed support for Ukraine on part of the West. This scenario will prompt both countries to rethink their geopolitical and economic strategies and face significant obstacles to maintaining strategic balance and global influence."
