Update: These UAE, international carriers suspend Mideast flights amid Iran-Israel-US tensions
Image: AI generated/ For illustrative purposes only
Israel's strikes against Iran have prompted
As the crisis entered a new phase following the US attack on Iranian nuclear sites, some airlines moved to cancel flights to hubs like Dubai and Qatar's Doha.
Below are some of the airlines that have cancelled their flights to and from the region:
AIRBALTIC
Latvia's airBaltic said that all flights to and from Tel Aviv until September 30 had been cancelled.
AEROFLOT
Russia's Aeroflot said that it had cancelled flights between Moscow and Tehran, and made changes to other routes in the Middle East.
AIR EUROPA
The Spanish airline said that it has cancelled its flights to and from Tel Aviv until July 31.
AIR FRANCE-KLM
Air France said that it had suspended its flights to and from Tel Aviv until further notice.
Air France KLM cancelled flights to and from Dubai and Riyadh on June 22 and June 23.
KLM said that it had cancelled all its flights to and from Tel Aviv until at least July 1 and added that some flights to, from or via Beirut until June 29 may be disrupted.
DELTA AIR LINES
The US carrier said that travel to, from, or through Tel Aviv may be impacted between June 12 and August 31.
EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINES
The carrier said that it had cancelled its regular flight schedule for EL AL and Sundor through June 23. Additionally, flights scheduled to depart through July 15 have been closed for new bookings until security situation becomes clearer.
ETIHAD AIRWAYS
It said that it had cancelled flights between Abu Dhabi and Amman until June 20 and between Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv until June 30.
EMIRATES
FLYDUBAI
Flydubai said that it had temporarily suspended flights to and from Iran, Iraq, Israel and Syria until June 30.
IAG
IAG-owned British Airways said that its flights to Tel Aviv remain suspended until July 31 and flights to Amman and Bahrain are suspended up to and including June 30.
The British carrier was set to resume Dubai and Doha flights on June 23 after cancelling routes to and from those airports the day before.
IAG's low-cost airline, Iberia Express, had previously said that it had cancelled its flights to Tel Aviv until June 30.
ISRAIR
The Israeli airline said that it had cancelled all its flights from and to Israel until June 30.
ITA AIRWAYS
The Italian Airline said that it would extend the suspension of Tel Aviv flights until July 31, including two flights scheduled on August 1.
LUFTHANSA GROUP
Lufthansa said that it had suspended all flights to and from Beirut until and including June 30 and to and from Tel Aviv and Tehran until and including July 31. Flights to and from Amman and Erbil are cancelled until and including July 11.
The German airline added that it would also refrain from using airspace of the countries concerned until further notice.
PEGASUS
The Turkish airline said that it had cancelled flights to Iran until June 30 and flights to Iraq, Lebanon and Jordan until June 23.
QATAR AIRWAYS
Qatar Airways said that it had temporarily cancelled flights to and from Iraq, Iran and Syria.
RYANAIR
Ryanair said that it had cancelled flights to and from Tel Aviv until September 30.
SINGAPORE AIRLINES
The Asian carrier on June 22 cancelled flying from Singapore to Dubai following a security assessment. The flight was set to resume on June 23.
TAROM
Romania's flag carrier said that it had suspended all commercial flights to and from Tel Aviv, Beirut and Amman until June 24.
TUS AIRWAYS
The Cypriot airline cancelled all its flights to and from Israel scheduled until June 24 (inclusive). Flights scheduled for departure between June 25 and June 30 are currently closed for sale, pending further developments, it said.
UNITED AIRLINES
The US carrier said that travel to and from Tel Aviv may be affected between June 13 and August 1. Flights to Dubai between June 18 and 25 may also be affected.
WIZZ AIR
Wizz Air said it had suspended its operations to and from Tel Aviv and Amman until September 15. The Hungarian airline will also avoid overflying Israeli, Iraqi, Irani and Syrian airspace until further notice.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
15 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Turkey rejects open-door policy for refugees if Iran falls apart
Israeli and US attacks on Iran risk sparking a regional war or even triggering regime change in the country, a development that has concerned Turkish officials in Ankara since September. The Israeli strikes that began earlier this month initially targeted Iran's nuclear infrastructure and air defence systems. Over time, however, Israel shifted its focus toward the Iranian government's command structure and later moved on to domestic security buildings. For example, on Monday, Israeli forces reportedly targeted the internal headquarters of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as well as the notorious Evin prison, where political prisoners are held. One Israeli minister even suggested that Israel was cooperating with the Iranian opposition, reinforcing Defence Minister Israel Katz's public statements that Israel seeks regime change or at least aims to undermine the Tehran government. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters That is a prospect that US President Donald Trump tried to normalise on Sunday night with a post on Truth Social. 'If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change???' he asked. The Turkish government is acutely aware of the repercussions of regime-change operations and wars, having experienced the destabilising effects of the 2003 US-led Iraqi invasion and, more recently, the 2011-24 Syrian civil war. These conflicts have often resulted in hundreds of thousands of refugees crossing into Turkey and have disrupted key sectors such as energy and trade. Turkish society remains highly sensitive about the presence of refugees, notably the 2.7 million Syrians, many of whom are now returning to Syria after the fall of Bashar al-Assad's government. Experts and officials emphasise that there is currently no new wave of refugees. However, several sources familiar with the issue told Middle East Eye that as early as September, the Turkish government conducted in-depth studies on potential migration scenarios. They estimated that a full-scale war between Israel and Iran could push up to one million Iranian refugees towards the Turkish border. 'Ankara would fulfil its obligations under humanitarian law, but it would not implement an open-door policy' Serhan Afacan, president, Center for Iranian Studies Turkey has the experience. In 2012, then-foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu attempted to control the influx of Syrian refugees by capping their number at 100,000 and threatening to establish a safe zone in northern Syria. However, the number of refugees quickly surpassed three million in the following years, which taught Ankara a difficult lesson. Now, sources say Ankara is unlikely to accept any refugees except those in urgent need of emergency assistance. 'If the worst-case scenario were to occur and there was a mass migration from Iran to Turkey, whether permanent or in transit, Ankara would fulfil its obligations under humanitarian law, but it would not implement an open-door policy,' Serhan Afacan, president of the Center for Iranian Studies in Ankara, told Middle East Eye. A Turkish official, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that Ankara would no longer apply an 'open door' policy toward any neighbouring country in the event of a refugee wave. Iranians currently can enter Turkey without a visa. An elite influx? Many Turkish citizens are particularly wary of the possible arrival of the 4.5 million Afghans currently living in Iran. However, Afacan noted that millions of Turkish-speaking ethnic Azerbaijanis also live in Iran. He said that if they were to gather at the border, it could shift the debate in Turkey and stir nationalistic sentiments. 'But at present, there are no indications that Turks in Iran are planning to migrate,' Afacan added. Last week, sources from the Turkish defence ministry told journalists there is currently no sign of a refugee influx into Turkey. Why has Turkey stopped short of condemning the US strikes on Iran? Read More » One source stated that additional security measures have been implemented along all borders, including with Iran, and there is no uncontrolled migration. The Turkish Armed Forces are said to be prepared for all possible scenarios arising from regional developments. This raises the question of whether Turkey would allow Iranian elites, including government officials, to enter if their government collapses. Many Iranians have already bought homes or acquired Turkish citizenship through investment in recent years. According to interior ministry data released this year, 76,000 Iranians hold residence permits in Turkey. At least 35,000 have purchased homes since 2019, according to the Turkish Statistical Institute data released in 2024. It is unclear whether all these purchases were made to obtain Turkish citizenship, but a naturalisation consultancy expert told MEE that Iranians are among the top nationalities seeking Turkish citizenship. Between 2012 and 2024, a total of 384,000 homes were sold to foreigners. Afacan said many Iranian officials and military officers already own property in Turkey. For instance, during the emergency elections following President Ebrahim Raisi's death in a helicopter crash last year, there was a major controversy over claims that Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and his family owned several luxurious apartments in an upscale Istanbul residence. Afacan added that, as in the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, albeit on a much smaller scale, a significant number of Iranian government officials would likely head to Turkey if the government were to fall. 'I do not believe that Turkey would close its doors to such individuals in that kind of scenario,' he said.
Middle East Eye
15 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Exclusive: UK privately says attacks on nuclear facilities not illegal
The British government has carefully refused to publicly reveal whether it supported the US bombing of Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday, and even whether it deems the attack to be lawful. On Monday morning in an interview with BBC Radio 4, British Foreign Secretary David Lammy repeatedly declined to say whether he believed the US strikes were legal. Now numerous diplomatic sources with knowledge of the matter have told Middle East Eye the UK's private stance is that attacks on nuclear facilities are not illegal and should not be banned by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). "The UK has taken the view that attacks on nuclear facilities are not by themselves illegal," said one British diplomat at the UN with knowledge of the matter who asked to remain anonymous. "This has put it at odds with the approach of most UNSC member states, which oppose such attacks outright." New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Another diplomat with knowledge of the matter, also speaking on condition of anonymity, told MEE: "Most Security Council member states take the view that strikes on nuclear facilities should be prohibited, but Britain opposes that. Iranians say their hopes of peace have been buried by US bombs Read More » "The British view is that these attacks are not illegal in and of themselves, and so they shouldn't be prohibited. This is the position conveyed to diplomats but it isn't said in public statements." One diplomatic source confirmed this but stressed that "while it may be a minority position in the Security Council, it isn't a unique view and the Russians take the same approach, although they've criticised this particular US attack." MEE asked the Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence to confirm whether the UK believes that attacks on nuclear facilities are not illegal. The Foreign Office did not respond directly but pointed MEE to Lammy saying on Monday morning that "questions of legality are for the Americans to discuss themselves". "We wanted to get the Iranians back to the table, there is still an off-ramp. I was discussing that with the Iranian foreign minister on the phone yesterday." The Foreign Office also denied Iranian reports that Lammy expressed regret over the US strikes to his Iranian counterpart, Abbas Araghchi, in a phone call on Sunday. 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon' After the US strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities - Fordow, Nantaz and Isfahan - which the UK did not participate in, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on X that "Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat." Notably, Starmer stopped short of endorsing the attack. "We call on Iran to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis," he said. The Security Council met on Sunday to discuss the US strikes, which UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said "marked a perilous turn". Guterres said at the meeting: "We must act – immediately and decisively – to halt the fighting and return to serious, sustained negotiations on the Iran nuclear programme." The UK's permanent representative to the UN, Barbara Woodward, echoed Starmer in her public statement at the meeting, saying that the US "took action last night to alleviate" the "serious threat" of Iran's nuclear programme. "My prime minister has been clear," she added. "We urge Iran now to show restraint, and we urge all parties to return to the negotiating table and find a diplomatic solution, which stops further escalation and brings this crisis to an end." Pakistan announced on Sunday that it would present along with Russia and China a joint UNSC resolution calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in the Middle East. Palestine Action to be proscribed as a terror group after break-in at UK's largest airbase Read More » The draft resolution condemns the US attack on "peaceful nuclear sites and facilities under the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] safeguards in the Islamic Republic of Iran". Britain is unlikely to vote in favour of the resolution. The Starmer government is attempting to perform a delicate balancing act in softly endorsing the outcome of the US attack on Iran while refusing to explicitly express support for the strikes themselves. When Israel launched its first wave of attacks against Iran, the UK was quick to announce that Britain played no role in the offensive or in helping to defend Israel against the retaliatory Iranian drone attacks, in contrast to previous episodes. Starmer has consistently made it clear that his government has no appetite for entanglement in the conflict, and is instead bent on promoting diplomacy. UK-Israel relations are increasingly strained, particularly after Britain sanctioned Israeli ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir nearly two weeks ago. Last week it was reported that Attorney General Richard Hermer, the UK government's top legal adviser, privately raised questions over whether Israel's bombing in Iran, which has killed at least 430 civilians, was lawful. Hermer reportedly said the UK should not be involved in the conflict "unless our personnel are targeted".
Khaleej Times
19 minutes ago
- Khaleej Times
Stocks climb, oil reverses gains amid Gulf flare-ups
Gulf stock markets gained ground on Monday as oil prices surged to a five-month high, driven by mounting geopolitical tensions following US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Investor anxiety has deepened over the possibility of an Iranian response, especially amid growing fears that Tehran may attempt to disrupt or block the critical Strait of Hormuz—a conduit for more than 20 per cent of the world's oil supply. Brent crude rose sharply in the wake of the US offensive, which marked a dramatic escalation in the ongoing Middle East conflict. This spike in oil prices, while boosting energy-exporting economies in the Arab Gulf, also reignited global concerns over inflation, supply chain fragility, and stagflation risks. However, gains were reversed later in the day. Around 7pm UAE time, Brent was down 0.93 per cent to $76.29, while West Texas Intermediate fell 0.99 per cent to $73.11. While investors across global markets adopted a cautious stance, the response in Gulf equity markets was more upbeat. Saudi Arabia's benchmark index advanced 0.7 per cent, led by gains in Al Rajhi Bank and Saudi Arabian Mining Company. Dubai's main index rose 1 per cent, with blue-chip developer Emaar Properties jumping 2.4 per cent and Dubai Islamic Bank gaining 1.7 per cent. Analysts attributed this relative optimism to speculation that direct US involvement might pressure Iran towards a diplomatic resolution. 'Regional markets are trying to price in both the risks and opportunities from the escalation,' said Hani Abuagla, senior market analyst at XTB MENA. 'Some investors are betting that the crisis may force stakeholders back to the negotiating table.' Despite the uptick in regional equities, global markets were jittery. US stock futures edged lower on Monday. Futures tied to the Dow Jones Industrial Average slipped 114 points, or 0.2 per cent, while S&P 500 and Nasdaq-100 futures both fell by 0.2 per cent. Last week, the S&P 500 posted a 0.15 per cent loss—its second consecutive weekly decline. Josh Gilbert, market analyst at eToro, said investors are approaching the week with a 'heightened sense of caution.' He noted that markets are witnessing a classic flight to safety, with equity futures down, bitcoin sliding below $100,000, and gold and oil prices trending higher. 'Until we see signs of de-escalation, this defensive positioning will continue,' Gilbert said. 'This kind of geopolitical uncertainty is becoming part of the new normal.' The key risk factor, he emphasised, remains the Strait of Hormuz. 'Any disruption to that key artery could lead to a sharp spike in oil prices in the short term,' Gilbert said, adding that while the UAE and other Arab Gulf exporters might benefit from higher crude prices, broader market volatility and inflationary pressures would weigh heavily on the global economy. Tavis McCourt, analyst at Raymond James, echoed this sentiment, warning that an escalation would likely result in a short-term rise in oil prices, interest rates, and the US dollar, fuelling fears of stagflation. 'Conversely, signs of resolution could revive risk appetite and reward dip buyers,' he wrote in a note. Vijay Valecha, chief investment officer at Century Financial, said crude prices briefly touched their highest levels since January, underpinned by expectations of Iranian retaliation. He pointed out that Iran's parliament had approved measures that could lead to blocking the Strait of Hormuz. 'Markets initially reacted to the headline risk, but are now bracing for Iran's next move,' he said. 'Even limited interference with tanker traffic could significantly reprice geopolitical risk.' Beyond immediate market moves, analysts warned of wider economic fallout. A disruption to the Strait would not only hurt global oil supply but could also deal a blow to Iran's own exports. Even without a full closure, sustained tension could upend shipping insurance costs, delay deliveries, and increase energy and food prices across importing nations. In particular, countries in Asia—heavily dependent on oil from the Arab Gulf—are expected to bear the brunt of rising costs. 'There is no real substitute for Gulf oil in the short term,' said Joaquin Vespignani, associate professor of finance at the University of Tasmania. 'For Indo-Pacific countries, higher import bills could force budget cuts elsewhere. Inflation will rise while incomes stagnate—a double blow for consumers.' He warned that nations with limited fiscal space could struggle to maintain current levels of infrastructure spending and welfare programs. 'This shock will ripple far beyond the Gulf, straining economies and consumers alike,' he added.
