Iraq

‘For 40 years, we’re protecting you’: US President Donald Trump criticises allies’ reluctance to commit forces to open the key waterway for Gulf oil exports.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attacks, which took place amid the escalating Israel-US war on Iran.

A prominent hotel in central Baghdad’s heavily fortified Green Zone was struck by a drone, amid reports that Iraqi air defences intercepted an attack over the United States Embassy.

The strike on Monday evening hit the top floor of Al-Rasheed Hotel, causing damage but no casualties, according to two Iraqi security officials cited by The Associated Press (AP) news agency.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Security sources told the Reuters news agency that two Katyusha rockets had been intercepted that evening near the US Embassy in the Green Zone, which houses diplomatic missions as well as international institutions and government offices.

Earlier Monday, the Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah announced that Abu Ali Al-Askari, a prominent security official with the paramilitary group, had been killed, without giving details on the circumstances.

Kataib Hezbollah is one of the largest groups in the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) operating in Iran, which was founded in 2014 to stop lightning advances by ISIL (ISIS).

On the same day, AP reported that six PMF fighters were killed in a strike on a checkpoint in western Iraq’s Anbar province, and two others were killed in a separate strike on the headquarters of a PMF brigade in the same area.

Two Iraqi security officials told AP that the Majnoon oilfield in Iraq’s southern Basra province was targeted by two drones. No casualties were reported, and it was not immediately clear if there was damage to the facilities.

Iraq’s oil industry has been severely impacted by the US and Israel’s war on Iran and Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil trading corridor.

Iraqi Minister of Oil Hayan Abdul-Ghani said in a video statement on Monday that a pipeline from the northern city of Kirkuk to Turkiye would be operational within a week, allowing the country to resume its oil exports, which have been interrupted by the ongoing war.

Also on Monday, air defences intercepted and shot down a drone near Erbil airport in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, according to security sources.

The Pentagon said the airmen on board the KC-135 plane were: John Klinner, 33, from Alabama; Ariana Savino, 31, from Washington; Ashley Pruitt, 34, from Kentucky; Seth Koval, 38, from Indiana; Curtis Angst, 30, from Ohio; and Tyler Simmons, 28, also from Ohio.

A strike on the heavily fortified United States embassy compound in Baghdad caused a fire and damage to the complex. It is the second attack on the embassy since the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran on February 28.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has been refreshing its travel advice for nations across the globe amid ongoing conflict in the Middle East, continuing to wreak havoc on international movement.

Beyond severely disrupting travel plans, the ongoing crisis is set to have far-reaching consequences for inflation, interest rates and commodity markets. British citizens have already been airlifted from Oman, the United Arab Emirates, and neighbouring regions, with Whitehall organising charter flights to repatriate nationals safely.

Those most at risk will receive priority booking on these evacuation flights, with the Foreign Office pledging to reach out to anyone who has registered their whereabouts in the affected zone, reports the Liverpool Echo.

In its guidance covering numerous Middle Eastern nations, the Foreign Office said: “Regional escalation poses significant security risks and has led to travel disruption. Stay away from areas around security or military facilities. Follow the instructions of the local authorities and monitor local and international media for the latest information.”

The advice went on: “If local authorities advise you to take shelter, stay indoors or move to the nearest safe building immediately. The greatest risk is from falling debris caused by intercepts, and you are safest inside a secure structure.

“Choose an interior stairwell or a room with as few external walls or windows as possible for additional protection.”

Political strife, natural calamities and safety issues are among the factors leading the UK Foreign Office to advise Brits against travelling to certain locations.

Afghanistan

Travel to Afghanistan is strongly discouraged. The security climate is unpredictable, with previous tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan resulting in violent skirmishes in border areas.

Travelling across Afghanistan poses extreme risks, and several border crossings are currently closed.

The likelihood of British nationals being detained in Afghanistan is significantly high. If you’re a Brit and find yourself detained in Afghanistan, you could be looking at a lengthy prison sentence spanning months or even years.

The FCDO’s capacity to assist you is severely restricted, and in-person support in Afghanistan is not feasible.

Belarus

The FCDO strongly advises against all travel to Belarus. If you’ve ever participated in activities now deemed illegal by the Belarusian regime, you run a substantial risk of arrest.

There’s also a minor risk that direct conflict related to the war in Ukraine could spill over into Belarus.

In the unlikely event of conflict breaking out, the FCDO’s ability to aid British nationals will be drastically limited. Ignoring advice from the FCDO could invalidate your travel insurance.

Burkina Faso

The FCDO advises against all travel to Burkina Faso due to the threat of terrorist attacks and kidnappings, coupled with the country’s unstable political situation.

There is no British Embassy in Burkina Faso and all consular support is provided from the British Embassy in Accra, Ghana. They cannot provide in-person assistance.

If there is serious violence, unrest or a deterioration in the security situation, it could be difficult to leave safely.

Haiti

The FCDO advises against all travel to Haiti owing to the unstable security situation. There are currently no British consular officials in Haiti and its ability to provide consular assistance is severely limited and cannot be delivered in person in Haiti.

If you choose to travel to or remain in Haiti against FCDO advice, attempt to avoid all crowds and public events, and take appropriate security precautions.

Iran

The FCDO advises against all travel to Iran. If you are a British national already in Iran, either resident or visitor, the Foreign Office said: “carefully consider your presence there and the risks you take by staying”.

British and British-Iranian dual nationals face significant risk of arrest, questioning or detention. Possessing a British passport or links to the UK can be reason enough for the Iranian authorities to detain you.

Iraq

The FCDO advises against all travel to Federal Iraq and the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. This is due to recent escalation in regional conflict.

There is significant risk of further escalation, and events are fast-moving and unpredictable. The Foreign Office said: “Regional escalation poses significant security risks and has led to travel disruption. The border crossing from Iraq into Kuwait is closed.

“British nationals wishing to cross into Kuwait must contact the British Embassy in Kuwait 24 hours in advance. The British Embassy will share names and passport details with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who will determine entry.”

Israel

The FCDO advises against all travel to Israel and Palestine: “Regional escalation poses significant security risks and has led to travel disruption. Stay away from areas around security or military facilities.”

Britons should inform the UK government of their presence in Israel, and register if they’re in the region for ongoing updates. You should adhere to instructions from local authorities and keep abreast of local and international media for the most current information.

Mali

The FCDO advises against all travel to Mali in its entirety owing to volatile security conditions. If you’re currently in Mali, you should depart “immediately” via commercial flight if you deem it safe to do so.

“The international airport in Bamako is open, and commercial flights are available. Do not try to leave Mali by overland routes to neighbouring countries as this is too dangerous. This is due to terrorist attacks along national highways.”

There remains a significant threat of abduction and criminal behaviour throughout Mali, including within the capital city of Bamako.

The Foreign Office warned: “If you choose to remain in Mali, you do so at your own risk. You should have a personal emergency plan that does not rely on the UK government.”

Niger

The FCDO advises against all travel to Niger. Officials said: “This is due to the rise of reported terrorist and criminal kidnappings of foreign nationals which have taken place this year in Niger. There is an ongoing risk of terrorist attacks throughout Niger including in the capital, Niamey.”

Support for British nationals is extremely limited in Niger. Assistance is delivered remotely from the British Deputy High Commission in Lagos.

Face-to-face help is unavailable. Should serious violence, civil unrest or a worsening security situation occur, departing safely could prove challenging.

Palestine

The FCDO advises against all travel to Israel and Palestine. UK citizens currently in the region should inform the Government of their whereabouts in Palestine and register their presence to receive ongoing updates.

Should you determine it’s safe to proceed and intend to use commercial departure options, verify the latest information from your airline or tour operator, alongside guidance from local authorities and the status of border crossings prior to travelling.

The Foreign Office cautioned: “The situation could escalate quickly and poses significant risks. Regional tensions may cause international borders (air and land) to close.”

Russia

The FCDO warns against all travel to Russia owing to the dangers and threats stemming from its ongoing invasion of Ukraine, including security incidents such as drone strikes and Russian air defence operations, a shortage of flights back to the UK, and restricted capacity for the UK government to offer assistance.

The Foreign Office said: “There is an increased risk of British nationals being detained in Russia, including if the Russian authorities suspect you of engaging in or supporting activities against Russian law, even if activities took place outside Russia.”

South Sudan

The FCDO warns against all travel to South Sudan due to the threat of armed violence and criminal activity.

“The political and security situation remains unpredictable. Political tensions are high and the security situation across the country could deteriorate rapidly and unpredictably.

“If the unstable security situation deteriorates, routes into and out of South Sudan may be blocked. Juba airport may close or be inaccessible. Flights may be cancelled at short notice.”

Syria

The FCDO warns against all travel to Syria owing to volatile security conditions and the risk of terrorist attacks. Consular support is unavailable from the British government within Syria.

The FCDO may learn of assistance offered by other organisations which can be shared with British nationals. Should you require help, contact the FCDO in London on +44 (0)20 7008 5000.

Yemen

The FCDO warns against all travel to Yemen in its entirety owing to unpredictable security conditions. The guidance states: “If you’re in Yemen, you should leave immediately.”

Assistance for British nationals is extremely restricted in Yemen. The British Embassy in Sana’a has suspended operations, with all diplomatic and consular personnel evacuated.

The UK government is unable to assist British citizens departing Yemen. No evacuation arrangements are currently in place.

Should you decide to stay in Yemen, you ought to keep movement around the country and within urban areas to a minimum, stay informed about changes in the local security landscape and observe other safety measures.

Videos posted by social media users showed smoke rising from the US embassy in Baghdad after a reported attack. Iraqi officials said a helipad at the embassy was hit by a missile.

Twenty-three years ago, the Oscars were in turmoil. President George W. Bush had just begun an invasion of Iraq after the Sept. 11 attacks, and as the nation’s TV screens filled with the “shock and awe” campaign, many did not know quite how to proceed with Hollywood’s biggest night.

ABC wanted to postpone, presenters begged off, Jack Nicholson urged his fellow actor nominees to boycott (animated feature winner Hayao Miyazaki did), documentary winner Michael Moore attempted to directly shame Bush from the stage (to loud boos) and many of the acceptance speeches acknowledged the war and included pleas for peace.

President Trump’s recent decision to attack Iran is not precisely the same — American troops have thus far not invaded and the Bush administration’s media blitz of rockets lighting up the sky is absent. No one expected the Oscars to be canceled or delayed and there has been no talk of boycotts; whether the war and (if polls are to be believed) its general unpopularity are noted, either by host Conan O’Brien (who has already said he will not be mentioning Trump) or the winners, remains to be seen.

But if recent history is any indication, it could go unmentioned. Which would be something of a political statement in itself: It would be terrible if the false notion that awards shows have become too political had a chilling effect on anyone who wanted to use their platform to speak about something important they care about.

Thus far, film and television awards winners have stayed away from the issues that have prompted widespread public outrage and protests this year — including the often brutal methods of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the ongoing concern over the war in Gaza and the endless revelations of the Epstein files.

Despite complaints from certain quarters, awards shows, particularly the Oscars, rarely have more than one or two truly political moments. But this year, the absence has been notable.

Compared with the Grammy Awards, where Trevor Noah, in his final stint as host, roasted Trump and anti-ICE sentiment reigned in speeches and on pins, this year’s Golden Globes (which aired three weeks before the Grammys) appeared to exist in another world. A few stars wore similar pins and spoke on the red carpet, but aside from a few digs about Epstein and CBS News from host Nikki Glaser, there was no mention of the many issues roiling the nation. (As he was beginning to make late-in-speech remarks about this being an important time to make films, Kleber Mendonça Filho, Brazilian director of the non-English language film winner “The Secret Agent,” ran over time and was played off.)

Has Hollywood lost its spine? Or, having been beset for years by grievances that the Oscars have become “too political” and “too woke,” are filmmakers and actors saving their outrage and passion for social media and bowing to pressure to keep their acceptance speeches grateful and celebratory?

“I know that there are people who find it annoying when actors take opportunities like this to talk about social and political things,” said Jean Smart on the Golden Globes red carpet, adding, when she won for actress in a TV comedy: “There’s just a lot that could be said tonight. I said my rant on the red carpet, so I won’t do it here.”

It was an echo of Jane Fonda’s famous 1972 Oscar speech: “There’s a great deal to say, and I’m not going to say it tonight.” And, perhaps, a response to more recent “shut up and dribble” criticism, as distilled by 2020 Golden Globes host Ricky Gervais, who cautioned the audience: “If you do win an award tonight, don’t use it as a platform to make a political speech. You’re in no position to lecture the public about anything. You know nothing about the real world.”

Indeed, as Oscars ratings have plummeted over the last 20 years, some have suggested that political speechifying is to blame. This is patently absurd. Viewership for just about everything except the Super Bowl has dropped dramatically, and the Oscars ratings do not take into account the millions who watch portions of the show on social media. (We’ll see what happens when the Oscars move to YouTube in 2029.)

And the Oscars have never been particularly political.

Speeches that deviate from the ubiquitous laundry list of thank yous always get more attention, whether they’re political or not, for the simple reason that they’re so dang unusual. But taken as a whole, either by decade or particular telecast, the Oscars is mostly, and consistently, apolitical. As in, almost every minute of a three-hour-plus show, year after year after year.

Unless, of course, you consider thanking God to be political. Which I do not. Nor do I categorize as such any speech that underlines the fact of a historic win (as Halle Berry did in 2002), encourages Hollywood to tell more diverse stories (as Cate Blanchett did in 2014) or reminds audiences in a general way that systemic oppression and war are bad (as Adrian Brody did amid his ramblings in 2025).

Many of the speeches that have been branded as “political” are simply underscoring the themes of the films being honored — in 2009, both Dustin Lance Black and Sean Penn advocated for gay rights when accepting Oscars for “Milk,” which chronicled the life of assassinated gay rights activist Harvey Milk. Likewise, John Irving supporting abortion rights and Planned Parenthood after winning for “The Cider House Rules” in 2000 and John Legend and Common speaking passionately about civil rights, past and present, after winning for “Glory,” a song from the civil rights drama “Selma,” in 2015 was only natural.

Sacheen Littlefeather refuses the lead actor Academy Award on behalf of Marlon Brando in 1973.

(Bettmann Archive)

A purely political speech, to my mind, directly calls out specific leaders, policies or crises, which may or may not have anything to do with the film being awarded. The most famous are, of course, Marlon Brando’s decision to send Sacheen Littlefeather to accept his Oscar for “The Godfather” and protest the treatment of Native Americans, and Vanessa Redgrave’s 1978 denunciation of “Zionist hoodlums” who were demonstrating against her involvement in a pro-Palestinian documentary even as she accepted for supporting actress in “Julia.”

In 1993, while many Oscars attendees wore red ribbons to honor those living with HIV/AIDS and call for government assistance, then-couple Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins took it further, using their time as presenters to ask the U.S. government to allow HIV-positive Haitians being held at Guantanamo Bay to be let into the country. That same year, presenter Richard Gere used the fact that “1 billion people” were watching to send “sanity” to Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping in the hopes that he would allow the people of Tibet to “live free.” (Then-Oscars producer Gil Cates quickly denounced the three presenters; Gere did not return to the Oscars until 2013.)

A year after Moore blasted Bush over Iraq, Errol Morris, winning for “The Fog of War,” briefly compared the war in Iraq to the “rabbit hole” of Vietnam (which was the subject of his film). In 2015, “Boyhood” star Patricia Arquette used most of her supporting actress speech to demand equal wages for women. That same year, “Birdman” director Alejandro G. Iñárritu dedicated his award to his fellow Mexicans, with the hope that they would be treated by Americans “with dignity and respect” so that together, they could build a “great immigrant nation.” (Which frankly plays more purely political now than it did at the time.) A year later, Leonardo DiCaprio spoke about climate change after winning for “The Revenant.”

In 2019, Spike Lee, accepting for adapted screenplay (“BlacKkKlansman”), called on voters in the upcoming election to mobilize and “be on the right side of history” and in 2024, “Zone of Interest” director Jonathan Glazer, accepting for international film, riled many by comparing the dehumanization required for the Holocaust to occur with events in Gaza.

Even now, the most notable examples of political speeches, the ones that are always mentioned, are from the freaking ‘70s. Which certainly obliterates the idea that the Oscars have grown more political and undermines the argument that it is a Big Problem.

Put these relatively few moments next to the endless hours of acceptance speeches that, with varying degrees of emotion, honor the art of movie-making and the legions that support those who are doing it (including God, parents, spouses, children, some random but heaven-sent teacher) and it’s difficult to see much “wokeness.”

The people who gather at the Oscars are storytellers, and many of the stories they tell deal with uncomfortable truths about our collective past, present and future (including best picture front-runners “One Battle After Another” and “Sinners”). Of course nominees and winners have opinions about politics, science, social issues, international conflict and those suffering without recourse or voice — that’s why they make movies. So if a few of them decide to skip thanking their manager or the studio head and say a few words about climate change or whatever current law/policy/presidential action they believe is making lives worse for a lot of people, that’s their choice. They just won an Oscar!

For those uncomfortable watching it, just use the 45 seconds to grab a snack and by the time you’re back, the host will be moaning about how long the show is and the next five winners will inevitably cry and smile; praise their fellow nominees; thank the producers; say something sweet about their cast, crew and mamas; before telling their kids they love them and it’s time to go to bed.

And that’s OK too.

March 13 (UPI) — The U.S. military confirmed Friday that four of six crew members of a refueling jet on combat operations in the Iran war were killed when it went down over western Iraq in an incident with another U.S. military aircraft.

A rescue operation mounted following the crash on Thursday night was ongoing. The second aircraft landed safely following the incident, which involved neither enemy or friendly fire, U.S. Central Command said in a news release.

“The circumstances of the incident are under investigation. The incident occurred in friendly airspace during Operation Epic Fury, and rescue efforts are ongoing. More information will be made available as the situation develops,” CENTCOM said

The identities of the service members were being withheld until 24 hours after their next of kin had been notified, it added.

CBS News said that the second aircraft, also a Boeing Stratotanker, declared an emergency before landing in Tel Aviv.

The BBC reported that there were six crew on board — a pilot, co-pilot, a boom operator responsible for operating the refueling arm and three others.

An Iraqi intelligence source told CBS the aircraft crashed on the border with Jordan, near the town of Turaibil.

The Iranian military claimed responsibility, saying that an allied militia group in Iraq had downed the aircraft with a missile.

Thursday’s crash came 10 days after three U.S. F-15E Strike Eagles crashed in Kuwait in a friendly-fire incident in which Kuwaiti air defenses “mistakenly shot down” the fighter jets. All six aircrew were rescued after safely ejecting.

The U.S. military’s Stratotanker fleet is a critical asset in its in-flight refueling capability, enabling aircraft to remain airborne for extended periods during missions without having to land to take on more fuel.

The crash in Iraq brings to 11 the number of U.S. military personnel killed since the United States and Israel launched their airborne offensive against Iran on Feb. 28.

A drone attack on a joint French-Kurdish base in northern Iraq has killed one French soldier and wounded several others. Iran-aligned armed groups have been carrying out attacks against US and coalition forces in the region.

Heavy Israeli strikes have hit Tehran, Iran, as its allies launch attacks across Gulf states, and shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has been severely disrupted, sending global oil prices soaring.

Meanwhile, political pressure is mounting in Washington as the conflict spreads across the region.

Here is what we know about what has been happening in the past 24 hours:

In Iran

Supreme leader speaks: Appointed last week following the assassination of his father, Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei has issued his first statement, warning that attacks on Israel and US military assets and infrastructure in the Middle East will continue unless bases hosting US forces in the region are closed.

Heavy strikes on Tehran: The Israeli military has launched a new “extensive wave” of air attacks on Iran’s capital, Tehran, leaving the city covered in thick smoke on Friday morning.

Strait of Hormuz closure and surging oil prices: The Strait of Hormuz, which connects the Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, is closed, causing Brent crude oil prices to surge past $100 per barrel. The strait, which falls into the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, is the only waterway to the open sea available to oil and gas producers in the Gulf. Iran has stated that the strait is under Iranian control and US-and Israel-linked ships are banned. Other vessels must receive Iranian permission to pass.

Civilian casualties: Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, said at least 1,348 civilians have been killed, with victims ranging in age from eight months to 88 years old.

In Gulf countries

Regional retaliation and attacks: Iran has launched waves of drones and missiles towards Gulf countries that host US military assets and troops, and has targeted oil tankers and facilities.

Bahrain: The nation has reported intercepting 114 missiles and 190 drones since the war began on February 28.

Saudi Arabia: The country intercepted 10 drones over its eastern region and later destroyed an additional 28 drones that breached its airspace.

Attacks on the UAE: The country has strongly condemned Iranian strikes on the region, and said they have hit Dubai International Airport and some hotels.

Evacuations: Australia has ordered all “non-essential” officials to leave the United Arab Emirates and Israel, and urged its citizens to evacuate the Middle East while it is still safe to do so

Qatar’s response: Qatar’s airspace is officially closed, but Qatar Airways has scheduled more than 140 special flights to help repatriate stranded residents and citizens.

Qatar has strongly rejected Israeli media claims that it intentionally paused liquefied natural gas (LNG) production to manipulate US energy prices; officials clarified that the suspension was actually forced by an Iranian drone attack.

In the US

Trump claims war moving ‘rapidly’: US President Donald Trump told reporters the war against Iran was moving “very rapidly”.

“It’s doing very well, our military is unsurpassed,” he said at the White House, not directly responding to the latest comments from Iran’s new supreme leader.

Domestic opposition: More than 250 US organisations have signed a letter calling on Congress to halt funding for the war. They argue the $11.3bn spent in the first six days of the conflict is diverting crucial funds from urgent domestic needs, such as food benefits.

No ‘need’ for ground troops in Iran: US Senator Lindsey Graham has played down the possibility of US troops being deployed to Iran, but suggested the war could continue for some time. “I don’t see this conflict ending today,” the Republican senator told reporters in Washington, DC.

In Israel

New missile wave launched at Israel: The Israeli military said early on Friday that Iran had fired a new barrage of missiles towards Israel, and instructed people in affected areas to head to shelters.

Israel strikes Basij force: Israel’s military said it had struck checkpoints set up in Tehran by the Basij force of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as part of efforts to undermine control by the authorities.

Regime change: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel can create conditions for regime change, but it is up to Iran’s people to take to the streets. He also said Israel is aiming to stop Iran from moving nuclear and ballistic projects underground.

In Lebanon, Iraq

Downed US aircraft: A US KC-135 refuelling aircraft crashed in western Iraq. While the Islamic Resistance in Iraq claimed it shot the aircraft down using air defence systems, US Central Command (CENTCOM) stated the aircraft went down in “friendly airspace” and was not the result of hostile fire.

Iraqi port closures: Iraq has shut its port operations after an Indian crew member was killed during an attack on a US-owned oil tanker in Iraqi waters.

Six French soldiers hurt: A drone attack wounded six French soldiers in Erbil, in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdish region, President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday.

Deadly attacks in southern Lebanon: Israeli bombardments continue on southern towns and villages. A strike on the village of Arki, near Sidon, killed nine people, including five children.

Mounting death toll and mass displacement: Lebanese officials have reported that at least 687 people have been killed in Israeli attacks on Lebanon since last Monday, including 98 children. The intense bombardments have displaced an estimated 700,000 to 750,000 people from their homes.

A KC-135 Stratotanker that was taking part in Operation Epic Fury has crashed in Iraq, U.S. Central Command announced.

“U.S. Central Command is aware of the loss of a U.S. KC-135 refueling aircraft,” the command stated Thursday afternoon in a media release. “The incident occurred in friendly airspace during Operation Epic Fury, and rescue efforts are ongoing. Two aircraft were involved in the incident. One of the aircraft went down in western Iraq, and the second landed safely.”

“This was not due to hostile fire or friendly fire,” the CENTCOM statement added. “More information will be made available as the situation develops. We ask for continued patience to gather additional details and provide clarity for the families of service members.”

Three American crewed aircraft are known to have been lost during Operation Epic Fury prior to today’s KC-135 loss. These were F-15Es that were shot down in a bizarre friendly fire incident.

This is a developing story. We will update this post with new information as soon as we get it.

UPDATE: 6:15 PM EDT –

The Times of Israel has reported that the second aircraft involved was another KC-135. That outlet also says that the KC-135 in question was one that landed at Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport earlier in the day after declaring an in-flight emergency. Online flight tracking data shows that tanker is a KC-135RT variant, one of a small subset of KC-135Rs that are themselves capable of being refueled in flight. This, in turn, allows them to make use of tanker support themselves to remain on station longer or to conduct longer-distance missions. You can read more about these “receiver-tankers” in this past TWZ feature.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has laid out terms for ending the war with the United States and Israel in what analysts say is a possible sign of de-escalation from Tehran as the US-Israel war on Iran entered its 13th day on Thursday.

In a post on Wednesday on social site X, Pezeshkian said he had spoken to his counterparts in Russia and Pakistan, and that he had confirmed “Iran’s commitment to peace”.

“The only way to end this war – ignited by the Zionist regime & US – is recognizing Iran’s legitimate rights, payment of reparations, and firm int’l guarantees against future aggression,” Pezeshkian wrote.

This is a rare posture from Tehran, which has maintained a defiant stance and initially rejected any possibility of negotiations or a ceasefire when war broke out nearly two weeks ago.

Pezeshkian’s statement comes as pressure mounts on the US to halt what has become a very costly mission. Analysts say speculation from Washington that Iran would quickly submit after the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei were misguided.

Tehran is likely going to determine the end of this war, not the US or Israel, because of its ability to inflict economic pain broadly, they say.

Amid a military pummelling by the US and Israel, Iran has launched heavy retaliatory strikes at US assets and other critical infrastructure in Gulf countries, upsetting global supplies. It has also adopted what analysts call “asymmetric” tactics – such as disrupting the critical Strait of Hormuz and threatening US banking-linked entities – to inflict as much economic pain on the region and wider world as it can.

This is what we know about Pezeshkian’s stance and what the pressures are on both sides to draw the conflict to a close, quickly.

What has the war cost so far?

Economically, both sides have weaponised energy. Israel first targeted Iran’s oil facilities in Tehran on March 8, prompting an outcry from global health experts over the potential risk of air and water pollution.

Iran has, meanwhile, tightened its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz shipping route – the only route to open sea for oil producers in the Gulf – with its military promising on Wednesday that it has the capabilities to wage a long war that could “destroy” the world economy.

Attacks on ships in the strait, through which about 20 percent of global oil and gas traffic normally passes, have effectively closed the route.

Oil prices rocketed above $100 per barrel late last week, up from around $65 before the war, with ordinary buyers feeling the increases at pumps in the US, Europe and parts of Africa.

On Wednesday, Iran upped the ante, saying it would not allow “a litre of oil” to pass through the strait and warned the world to expect a $200-per-barrel price tag.

“We don’t know how quickly it’ll revert back,” Freya Beamish, chief economist at GlobalData TS Lombard, told Al Jazeera. “We do think it’ll revert back to $80 in due course, but the ball is to some degree in Iran’s court,” she said, adding that because Iran needs oil revenue, the price hikes are expected to be time-limited.

The International Energy Agency agreed on Wednesday to release 400 million barrels from the emergency reserves of several member states but it is not yet clear what impact that will have, nor how quickly this quantity of oil can be released.

Tehran has also been accused of directly attacking oil facilities in neighbouring countries this week. Iraq shut all its oil port operations on Thursday after explosive-laden Iranian “drone” boats appeared to have attacked two fuel tankers in Iraqi waters, setting them ablaze and killing one crew member.

A drone was filmed striking Oman’s Salalah oil port on Wednesday, although Tehran has denied involvement.

What are Iranian officials saying about ending the war?

There has been conflicting messaging from the Iranian leadership.

Iran’s elite army unit and parallel armed force, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), continues to show defiance, issuing threats and launching attacks on Israel and US military assets and infrastructure in neighbouring Gulf countries.

However, the political leadership has appeared more inclined towards diplomacy, analysts say. On Wednesday, President Pezeshkian said that ending the war would take the US and Israel recognising Iran’s rights, paying Iran reparations – although it’s unclear how much is being asked for – and providing strong guarantees that a future war will not be waged.

In a video recording last week, he also apologised to neighbouring countries for the strikes and promised that Iran would stop hitting its neighbours as long as they do not allow the US to launch attacks from their territory.

“I personally apologise to the neighbouring countries that were affected by Iran’s actions,” the president said, adding that Tehran was not looking for confrontations with its neighbours.

However, it is not known how much sway the political leadership has over the IRGC. Hours after the president’s apology last week, air defence sirens went off in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE and Bahrain, as strikes continued on the Gulf.

So, what is Iran’s actual position?

“Iran wants to go to the end to make sure that the United States and Israel never attack Iran again … so this has to be the final battle,” Al Jazeera’s Resul Serdar Atas explained.

Indeed, the IRGC sees this as an existential war, but the timing of Pezeshkian’s statement about ending the conflict also shows Tehran is pressured economically, politically and militarily, Zeidon Alkinani of Qatar’s Georgetown University told Al Jazeera.

“These differences and divisions [between IRGC and political leaders] always existed even prior to this war but we may notice it now more, given the fact that the IRGC believes that it has the right to take the front seat in leading this regional war, which is why a lot of the statements and positions are contradicting with the official ones from Pezeshkian,” he said.

The IRGC reports directly to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) and not to the country’s political leadership. That council is led by Ali Larijani, a top politician and close aide to the late supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, who analysts describe as a “hardliner”.

In a post on X on Tuesday, Larijani responded to threats from Trump about attacks on the Strait of Hormuz, saying: “Iranian people do not fear your hollow threats; for those greater than you have failed to erase it … So beware lest you be the ones to vanish.”

The newly elected supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, was once in the IRGC and was put forward by the unit as the next ayatollah after his father was killed on the first day of the war, analysts say. He is thus not expected to follow the reformist, diplomatic ideals of President Pezeshkian and other political leaders which his father managed to marry with the IRGC militarised stance, they say.

What do the US and Israel say about ending the war?

There have also been conflicting messages from the Trump administration and Israel regarding when the war mission on Iran, codenamed Operation Epic Fury, is likely to end.

Trump told US publication Axios on Wednesday that the war on Iran would end “soon” because there’s “practically nothing left to target”.

“Anytime I want it to end, it will end,” he added. He had said earlier on Monday that “we’re way ahead of our schedule” and that the US had achieved its goals, even as speculation mounts about a possible US ground mission.

On the other hand, Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz said on Wednesday that the war would go on “without any time limit, for as long as necessary, until we achieve all the objectives and decisively win the campaign”.

Analysts say Trump’s stance that the conflict will be quick reflects increasing pressure on his administration ahead of upcoming mid-term elections in November.

Trump’s advisers privately told him this week to find a quick end to the war and avoid political backlash, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal. That came as polls from Quinnipiac University and The Washington Post suggested that most Americans are opposed to the war in Iran.

In his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump promised to lower prices, and inflation had stabilised at 2.4 percent ahead of the war, according to government data released on Wednesday. Analysts speculate the conflict will likely push it back up.

The US spent more than $11.3bn in the first six days of the war, Pentagon officials told lawmakers in a classified briefing on Tuesday, Reuters reported this week – nearly $2bn a day.

The Washington-based think tank, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), estimated that the war cost Washington $3.7bn in its first 100 hours alone, or nearly $900m a day, largely due to its expenditure on costly munitions.

“It’s quite ironic that [Trump] chose a war that would make affordability worse, not better,” Rebecca Christie, a senior fellow at the Bruegel think tank, told Al Jazeera’s Counting the Cost.

“Every time the US loses even one object, air defence or a plane or something like that, that represents an awful lot of money that could have been used on some of these issues that have an impact on people’s day-to-day lives in the United States.”

One the UK’s biggest tour operators has suspended its profit guidance after revealing impact of Middle East war on bookings

Spooked Brits are putting their holiday plans on hold because of the Middle East crisis.

Leading holiday firm On the Beach revealed a “significant” drop in demand from British families to Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, and Egypt. “The timing of when the conflict will end and the shape of recovery in demand to these destinations are unknown,” it said.

At the same time, there are are warnings that the cost of a summer getaways could jump after a spike in jet fuel prices. It comes as many UK families would be booking sunshine trips for the Easter holidays.

The scale of the hit to bookings was enough for On the Beach to suspend its full year profit guidance. Boss Shaun Morton said: “Following the onset of the conflict in the Middle East, our operational teams have been working round the clock to support directly impacted customers in resort and to enable a return home as soon as possible.”

READ MORE: Saudi oil giant warns of ‘catastrophic consequences’ to global fuel suppliesREAD MORE: Mortgage rates hit 5% and deals slump after latest Iran war fall-out

The fall-out from the Iran war has already seen fuel prices jump and the cost of fixed rate mortgages rise. Industry experts Moneyfacts said the average two-year fixed rate mortgage had risen again, from 5.01% 5.04%. The average five-year fixed deal went up from 5.09% to 5.13%.

It came as oil prices remained at around $100 on Thursday – as two tankers were ablaze in Iraqi waters after what appeared to be Iranian strikes.

The latest wave of attacks on oil and transport facilities across the Middle East came as Iran warned the world should be ready for oil to hit $200 a barrel.

The conflict has spread across the region and prompted the International Energy Agency to recommended releasing 400 million barrels from reserves to dampen one of the worst oil shocks since the 1970s, the biggest such intervention in history.

Iran has made clear it intends to impose a prolonged economic shock.

Oil prices, which shot up earlier in the week to nearly $120 a barrel before retreating, jumped almost 10% back above $100 amid renewed fears about supply disruption.

Iranian explosive-laden boats appear to have attacked two fuel tankers in Iraqi waters setting them ablaze and killing one crew member.

Chris Beauchamp, chief market analyst at IG, said: “Overnight attacks on shipping off Iran are the stuff of nightmares for investors, confirming that one of the world’s key waterways is closed to shipping and resulting in a fresh surge in oil prices.”

US President Donald Trump claimed the IEA decision “will substantially reduce oil prices as we end this threat to America and the world.”

So far there has been no sign that ships can safely sail through the Strait of Hormuz, the now-blockaded channel along the Iranian coast that serves as a conduit for around a fifth of the world’s oil.

An Iranian military spokesperson said the Strait was “undoubtedly” under Iran’s control.

Iran’s sports minister said his nation will not participate in this summer’s World Cup following the attacks on the country by the U.S., one of the tournament’s hosts.

The U.S. bombing campaign against Iran, which began two weeks ago, has triggered a region-wide conflict and killed more than 1,300 Iranians including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the country’s supreme leader, according to Iran’s U.N. ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani.

“Considering that this corrupt regime has assassinated our leader, under no circumstances can we participate in the World Cup,” sports minister Ahmad Donyamali said on state television Wednesday.

“Our players do not have security, and fundamentally the conditions for participation do not exist.”

Donyamali’s statement came just hours after FIFA president Gianni Infantino said he had received assurances from President Trump that Iran would be allowed to participate in the tournament, which will be played in the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

“President Trump reiterated that the Iranian team is, of course, welcome to compete in the tournament in the United States,” Infantino wrote in an Instagram post. “We need an event like the FIFA World Cup to bring people together now more than ever, and I sincerely thank the President of the United States for his support.”

Last year President Trump signed an executive order suspending visa issurance to nationals of 19 countries, including Iran, although the State Department can make exceptions for “participants in certain major sporting events” such as the World Cup.

Iran, which has played in the last three World Cups, earned its place in this summer’s tournament by dominating its group in the Asian confederation tournament. However it did not send a representation to a World Cup planning summit last week in Atlanta.

Iran was drawn into Group G for the World Cup and is scheduled to begin play June 15 against New Zealand at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood. Iran’s second group-stage game, against Belgium, is also scheduled for SoFi Stadium before the team finishes the first stage of the tournament against Egypt in Seattle.

According to The Athletic, no country has withdrawn from a World Cup after qualifying since the 1950 tournament in Brazil, when India, Scotland, France and Turkey pulled out, mostly over costs and logistical issues.

Donyamali did not say whether he has begun the formal process or withdrawing Iran from the World Cup but FIFA could be facing a time crunch if it had to replace Iran in the 48-team field. Article 6.7 of FIFA’s 2026 World Cup regulations states: ‘If any Participating Member Association withdraws and/or is excluded from the FIFA World Cup 26, FIFA shall decide on the matter at its sole discretion and take whatever action is deemed necessary. FIFA may decide to replace the Participating Member Association in question with another association.”

The most likely replacement scenario would have Iraq, the top non-qualifier from the Asian confederation, taking Iran’s place. Iraq is scheduled to play the winner of a Suriname-Bolivia playoff in Mexico later this month for a final World Cup berth but with airspace over the Middle East closed because of the war, the Iraqis are unsure how they will get to Mexico. Giving them Iran’s berth would solve that problem but it would create another; who would replace Iraq in the playoff against the Suriname-Bolivia winner? Based on the Asian qualifying tournament, the UAE would be the most likely candidate but it, too, would face travel concerns in getting to Mexico.

FIFA could leave those playoffs untouched and give Iran’s spot to Italy, which is ranked 13^th in the world but must win a four-team UEFA playoff later this month to qualify for the World Cup. Basically FIFA can do whatever it wants.

FIFA regulations say that any team that withdraws from the tournament “no later than 30 days before the first match” will be fined and could face other “disciplinary sanctions” including expulsion from subsequent FIFA competitions. This summer’s World Cup kicked off June 11 in Mexico City and Toronto. The U.S. opener is scheduled for June 12 in Inglewood.

Earlier this week six members of Iran’s delegation to the Women’s Asian Cup were granted humanitarian visas and allowed to remain in Australia rather than return to Iran where they feared persecution for not singing the national anthem during the tournament.

Two foreign tankers were seen ablaze in Iraqi territorial waters after a strike near the al-Faw port. Authorities say they evacuated 25 crew members but have confirmed at least one death and are battling to control the flames.

Footage from the ground in Erbil, Iraq shows several drones over the city’s airspace and the wrecking of a drone falling through the sky onto the city.

US president says he’d be ‘all for’ Kurdish ground assault on Iran amid reports that Washington is egging on rebellion.

Donald Trump has expressed public support for a possible Kurdish offensive against Iran as the United States pushes to destabilise the Iranian governing system internally.

“I think it’s wonderful that they want to do that, I’d be all for it,” the US president told the Reuters news agency on Thursday when asked about the prospects of a Kurdish rebellion in Iran.

Several US media outlets have reported that Trump called leaders in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region of Iraq to enable Iranian Kurdish groups launch a ground offensive inside Iran.

In his comments on Thursday, Trump declined to say whether the US would provide air support for Kurdish rebels.

The White House had confirmed that the US president contacted Kurdish leaders in Iraq but denied that Trump agreed to a plan to push for an armed uprising by the Kurds in Iran.

“The president has held many calls with partners, allies and leaders in the region, in the Middle East,” Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Wednesday.

“He did speak to Kurdish leaders with respect to our base that we have in northern Iraq.”

US assets in Erbil in the Kurdish region of Iraq have come under repeated Iranian drone and missile attacks since the war started.

Iran is home to millions of Kurds, mostly living in the west of the country.

Kurds represent a sizable ethnic minority in Iraq, Syria and Turkiye, as well.

Earlier this week, Mustafa Hijri, head of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (PDKI), a prominent Kurdish opposition group, called for desertion from the Iranian army and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

“I call upon all aware and freedom-seeking soldiers and personnel across Iran, and especially in Kurdistan, to abandon the barracks and military centres of the IRGC, the army, and other military forces of the regime, to refuse their assigned duties, and to return to the embrace of their families,” Hijri wrote on X.

“This action is important both for preserving their lives in the face of these attacks and as a sign of turning their backs on the regime’s military and repressive forces.”

On several occasions in recent decades, Washington has urged Kurdish groups seeking autonomy to rebel against governments it viewed as hostile in the region, only to cut off support to them or fail to come to their aid when the political situation changes.

Some critics have warned that stoking ethnic tensions in Iran could lead to a civil war that could further destabilise the entire region.

On Wednesday, Iran’s Press TV reported that the IRGC launched missiles and drones at the headquarters of “anti-Iran terrorist groups in the Iraqi Kurdistan region”.

The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq has condemned the Iranian attacks on the region while also “categorically denying reports of playing a role in an offensive against Iran.

“At the same time, the Kurdistan Regional Government and the political parties within it are not part of any campaign to expand the war and tensions in the region,” the KRG said in a statement. “On the contrary, we call for peace and stability in the region.”

But with government troops showing no signs of defection despite thousands of US and Israeli strikes, the Trump administration has struggled to find a prominent friendly force on the ground in Iran.

Despite the US president’s repeated calls for Iranians to rise up against their government, there have been no significant protests since the war began on Saturday.

“Covert action should not be confused with missionary work,” former United States Secretary of State Henry Kissinger declared after the sudden abandonment of Iraqi Kurds to their fate against the Iraqi government in 1975.

Half a century later, this doctrine of geopolitical expediency echoes across the Middle East. As the US and Israel encourage Kurdish militias to serve as a ground force against Iran’s central government, knowing their aspiration for “regime change” needs a ground force, history offers a severe warning.

From the mountains of Iraq in 1991 to the plains of Syria just weeks ago, Washington’s track record of using Kurdish fighters as disposable proxies suggests the current push for an Iranian Kurdish rebellion is fraught with risk.

Amid a rapidly escalating military confrontation that has seen US-Israeli air strikes assassinate top Iranian leaders, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Washington is seeking to open a new front.

Some US media reports claimed that thousands of Iranian Kurds have crossed from Iraq to launch a ground operation in northwestern Iran. That has not been verified. The US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has reportedly supplied these forces with light weapons as part of a covert programme to destabilise the country.

To facilitate this, US President Donald Trump reportedly held calls with Iraqi Kurdish leaders Masoud Barzani and Bafel Talabani as well as Iranian Kurdish leader Mustafa Hijri. While the White House and Kurdish officials in Erbil denied these reports, regional analysts remained wary.

The government of northern Iraq’s semiautonomous Kurdish region on Thursday denied involvement in any plans to arm Kurdish groups and send them into Iran.

Its president, Nechirvan Barzani, said it “must not become part of any conflict or military escalation that harms the lives and security of our fellow citizens”.

“Protecting the territorial integrity of the Kurdistan Region and our constitutional achievements can only be achieved through the unity, cohesion and shared national responsibility of all political forces and components in Kurdistan,” he added.

Mahmoud Allouch, a regional affairs expert, told Al Jazeera that the current strategy is aimed not simply at an immediate government overthrow but at “dismantling Iran” by inciting separatist movements as a prelude to its collapse. “The US and Israel want to produce a separatist armed Kurdish case in Iran similar to the Kurdish case that America imposed in Syria,” Allouch warned.

Added to this volatile mix is Turkiye and how it would react to any Kurdish uprising in the region. The Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) began steps towards disarmament last summer, closing a chapter on a four-decade armed campaign against the Turkish state in a conflict that has killed more than 40,000 people. Any armed advances by Iranian Kurds could rankle Ankara.

A legacy of betrayal and unintended gains

For the Kurds, acting as the tip of the American spear has historically ended in disaster. In the 1970s, the US and Iran heavily armed Iraqi Kurdish rebels to bleed the government in Baghdad. Yet, once the shah of Iran secured a territorial concession from Iraq in 1975, he cut off the Kurds overnight with Washington’s approval. He himself was deposed in a revolution four years later.

This scenario repeated itself with devastating consequences in 1991. After then-US President George HW Bush encouraged Iraqis – both the Kurdish and Shia communities persecuted under Saddam Hussein – to rise up, the US military stood by as loyalist forces regrouped and used helicopter gunships to indiscriminately slaughter tens of thousands of civilians and rebels.

However, David Romano, a Middle East politics expert at Missouri State University, countered in a statement on his Facebook page that the aftermath of the 1991 catastrophe eventually forced the US to launch Operation Provide Comfort and a no-fly zone, which laid the groundwork for the semiautonomous Kurdish region in Iraq. “At important junctures, the Kurds have done exceedingly well as a result of cooperation with the US,” Romano wrote although he noted the opposite was true in 1975.

The Syrian quagmire

The dark irony of Washington asking Iranian Kurds to take up arms today is compounded by the recent collapse of Kurdish autonomy in neighbouring Syria. For years, the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) served as the primary US proxy against ISIL (ISIS) and led the way to vanquishing the armed group in 2019 after years of fighting and suffering.

Yet in January, a little more than a year after the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad, the Trump administration backed Syria’s new central government in Damascus, essentially ending support for the SDF and Kurdish autonomy.

The US envoy to Syria, Thomas Barrack, declared that the original purpose of the SDF had largely expired. Within weeks, the SDF lost 80 percent of the territory it had bled for. For the Kurds across the region watching these events unfold, the implications were profound: The US is no longer perceived as a reliable partner or supporter of minorities.

Allouch highlighted this as a primary reason for Kurdish hesitation concerning Iran today, noting that Kurdish leaders are “bleeding from yesterday’s stab” in Syria.

Calculated rejections and the Iranian gamble

The US and Israel are seeking “boots on the ground” to avoid deploying their own forces. But in Erbil, the capital of the Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq, the leadership understands the severe blowback. Barzani recently emphasised to the Iranian foreign minister that the region “will not be a party to the conflicts”.

Analysts suggested that Barzani remains angered by the US dismissal of a 2017 independence referendum for the region. Romano noted that because Baghdad vociferously rejected attacking Iran, Erbil has a perfect justification to decline Washington’s requests after decades of being told by the US to remain integrated within Iraq.

The calculus is different for Iranian Kurds, known as Rojhelati. Betrayed by the Soviet Union in 1946, they have acutely suffered under successive Iranian governments and may view this as their “first and only opportunity” to change their status.

However, Allouch warned that without a solid US military commitment, which Trump has shown no desire to provide, this move could be “suicidal” against a fierce Iranian military response.

The regional veto

Pushing Iranian Kurds into an open conflict remains a highly volatile endeavour that has triggered an immediate reaction from Turkiye. Allouch told Al Jazeera that Ankara will coordinate with the Iranian government to crush any uprising.

“The US and the international powers realise that they cannot, in the end, impose a reality that contradicts the interests of the ‘Regional Quartet’ – Turkiye, Syria, Iran and Iraq,” Allouch said. He argued that this regional bloc applies far more pressure regarding the Kurdish issue than shifts in international policies.

Ultimately, the Kurds have consistently paid the price of changing geopolitics. As Washington seeks a cost-free rebellion with no ground deployment or losses of its own soldiers in Iran, the Kurds will weigh seductive American promises against the blood-soaked lessons of 1975, 1991 and 2026.

Iran has launched operations targeting Iranian and Iraqi Kurdish groups in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region in neighbouring Iraq as the regional war ignited by the United States and Israel entered its sixth day, with more than 1,000 people killed across the country.

State television, Press TV, reported early on Thursday that Tehran was striking “anti-Iran separatist forces”, referring to Iranian and Iraqi Kurdish groups believed to be based in mountainous, hard-to-reach areas near the Iran-Iraq border.

Iranian missiles hit Sulaimaniyah city in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region, according to local reports.

“We targeted the headquarters of Kurdish groups opposed to the revolution in Iraqi Kurdistan with three missiles,” Iran’s official IRNA news agency reported on Thursday, quoting a military statement. The Iranian military said earlier on Tuesday it used “30 drones” on Kurdish positions.

The attack comes just days after multiple publications reported that US President Donald Trump was in active talks with Iranian and Iraqi Kurdish groups, and that Washington hopes to use them to spur a popular uprising.

Various Iranian Kurdish groups, which share close ties with Iraqi Kurds, have long opposed Tehran from their bases in northern Iraq and along the Iraq-Iran border. These groups reportedly have thousands of fighters between them.

Here’s what we know so far:

Why are Kurdish groups cooperating with the US?

US officials said the aim is to stretch Iranian forces and take out the remains of the military-dominated Iranian government, according to reporting by CNN.

There is also speculation that the groups could be supported to take control of northern Iran to create a ground buffer for Israeli forces, possibly streaming in from Iraq.

US-Israeli bombings have heavily targeted areas along the Iraq-Iran border since the start of the war on Saturday, possibly to degrade Iranian defences and allow Kurdish opposition groups to cross fully into Iran, according to a briefing by US-based think tank, the Soufan Center.

The US has not ruled out sending ground forces, although analysts told Al Jazeera Iran’s rugged territory would make that very difficult.

If the US does support these groups against Tehran, it would mean that Washington is treating them like armed “players on a board,” Winthrop Rodgers, associate fellow at the UK think tank, Chatham House, told Al Jazeera.

Which Kurdish groups are there?

Neither the US nor Kurdish groups had confirmed any agreements by Thursday.

However, it is known that Trump has spoken to the leaders of two Kurdish groups in Iraq: Masoud Barzani, leader of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, and Bafel Talabani, leader of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), according to US publication, Axios. Talabani confirmed the call on Wednesday.

Trump also spoke to Mustafa Hijri, head of the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (KDPI), on Tuesday, CNN reported, quoting a Kurdish official.

Meanwhile, Iranian Kurdish rebel groups, which have thousands of fighters along the Iraq-Iran border, formed the Coalition of Political Forces of Iranian Kurdistan (CPFIK) alliance one week before the war broke out.

The group issued statements at the start of the conflict, signalling imminent intervention and urging Iranian military members to defect. According to Israel’s I24News, thousands of its fighters were in Iran by Wednesday.

Here are the different groups:

Kurdistan Democratic Party: The ruling party in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). The party controls the capital city of Erbil as well as Duhok. It has historical ties with Iranian Kurdish groups.

However, the KRG is not eager to be seen as supporting attacks on Iran, even as Iranian drones have hit US assets in Erbil. On Wednesday, Kurdistan region President Nechirvan Barzani spoke with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and told him his region “will not be part of conflicts” targeting Tehran.

In 2023, the two countries signed a security deal that saw Iraq promise to disarm and relocate Iranian opposition groups on its territory, although it appears many groups are still based there, reflecting the limited influence the government wields over them.

Iraqi Kurds, who have close ties with both the US and Iran, are in a “difficult position”, said Rodgers.

“They are under tremendous pressure from a wide range of forces, including (pro-Iran) Iraqi militias. They will try to stay out of the conflict as much as they can, but that will likely prove impossible,” he said.

Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK): The PUK is the official opposition in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region and also nationally relevant as Iraqi President Abdul Latif Rashid is a member. In a statement on Sunday, Rashid urged dialogue and an end to the war. Iraq declared three days of mourning following the killing of Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in US-Israeli strikes on Tehran on Saturday.

Coalition of Political Forces of Iranian Kurdistan (CPFIK): Formed on February 22, 2026, the group includes six Iranian Kurdish opposition groups seeking an independent state.

Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI) – Based in the Kurdistan region, the group has about 1,200 members and is proscribed as a “terror” group by Iran.

Kurdistan Freedom Party (PAK) – Also based in Kurdistan, it has an estimated 1,000 members.

Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK) – A close ally of the Turkish opposition armed group, Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), PJAK is proscribed as a “terror” group by Ankara. PJAK’s armed wing, the Eastern Kurdistan Units (YRK), is believed to have between 1,000 and 3,000 members, many of them women. It is based in the rugged Qandil Mountains near the Iran-Iraq border and in the semiautonomous Kurdistan region. It has launched numerous attacks on Iranian forces in the past decade. A recent Iranian strike reportedly killed one fighter.

Organisation of Iranian Kurdistan Struggle (Khabat) – It has an unknown number of fighters.

Komala of the Toilers of Kurdistan – Based in Iraq’s KRG, it has an unknown number of fighters.

Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan (KPIK) – Also headquartered in the Kurdistan region, it has an estimated 1,000 fighters in 2017.

What is the history of US involvement with Kurdish resistance groups in the Middle East?

Kurds are an ethnic minority spread across the Middle East with a shared language and culture. They do not have a state of their own and have historically been marginalised across countries – mainly Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkiye.

For decades, several armed Kurdish groups have sought self-governance in Turkiye, Syria and Iran.

In Iraq, Kurdish nationalist groups gained some success during the 1991 Gulf War by working with the US, which helped establish the self-governing Kurdistan region of Iraq. The US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) also trained and armed its army, known as the Peshmerga, after the US invaded Iraq in 2003. In 2005, the semiautonomous region was officially recognised in Iraq’s constitution.

Since 2017, Washington has also armed and trained the People’s Protection Units (YPG), a Syrian Kurdish militia that Turkiye lists as a “terror” group because of its links with the proscribed PKK. The group, which successfully resisted ISIL (ISIS), now forms the main component of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). It controlled Raqqa and other ISIL strongholds.

However, when it began military clashes with Syrian forces under the President Ahmed al-Sharaa-led government last August, Washington turned away from the group and backed Damascus instead. In January this year, the SDF signed an agreement with the Syrian government to integrate into the government forces. In return, the Syrian government recognised Kurdish rights.

In Turkiye, meanwhile, the PKK, whose presence in northern Iraq has long been a source of tension with Ankara, declared a ceasefire in March 2025, after a call from its imprisoned leader, Abdullah Ocalan, to disarm.

How does Kurdish resistance in Iran compare with others?

Iranian Kurds opposed the Iranian government even before the formation of the Islamic Republic in 1979, Rodgers said, and Tehran’s current weakness provides an opportunity for them to advance their political aims in the country.

However, the new coalition of multiple diverse groups is unprecedented, the analyst added, and their internal dynamics will be a key decisive factor in what role Kurdish groups will play in this war.

“Support from the US is helpful, especially in terms of targeting security forces’ infrastructure with air strikes, but they will likely be cautious about relying too much on Washington, especially from an administration as capricious and disorganised as Trump’s,” Rodgers said, noting how Washington abandoned the Kurds in Syria.

Unlike the split Iranian movements, Iraqi Kurds have long united to form a devolved government enshrined in the Iraqi constitution, built an advanced economy, and secured substantive relations with a wide range of foreign countries. That’s something Kurdish groups will also be hoping to establish in a democratic Iran, he said.

“I think it is unlikely that the Trump administration has made any commitments to the Iranian Kurds about supporting their political goals,” Rodgers said, adding that the US’s plan “does not look fully thought through at all”.

The killing of prominent Iraqi women’s rights activist Yanar Mohammed has fuelled an outpouring of grief and calls for justice, with advocates from around the world remembering Mohammed as a “courageous” voice.

Mohammed, 66, was killed earlier this week after unidentified gunmen on a motorcycle opened fire outside her home in the north of Iraq’s capital, Baghdad.

“Despite being rushed to the hospital and attempts to save her life, she succumbed to her wounds,” the Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq, a group that Mohammed co-founded, said in a statement shared on social media.

“We at the Organisation for Women’s Freedom in Iraq condemn in the strongest terms this cowardly terrorist crime, which we consider a direct attack on the feminist struggle and the values of freedom and equality.”

Several international rights groups also condemned Mohammed’s killing, with Amnesty International on Wednesday decrying the deadly attack as “brutal” and “a calculated assault to stifle human rights defenders, especially those defending women’s rights”.

The organisation, which said Iraq’s Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al‑Sudani ordered an investigation into the killing, also called on the Iraqi authorities to ensure the perpetrators are brought to justice.

“Yanar Mohammed … dedicated her life to defending women’s rights,” Amnesty’s Iraq researcher, Razaw Salihy, said in a statement. “The Iraqi authorities must stop this pattern of targeted attacks in their tracks, and take seriously the sustained smear campaigns designed to discredit and endanger activists.”

Mohammed was one of Iraq’s most prominent women’s rights activists, working since the early 2000s “to protect women facing gender-based violence, including domestic abuse, trafficking, and so-called ‘honour killings’”, Front Line Defenders said.

Her work included the establishment of safe houses, which sheltered hundreds of women experiencing exploitation and abuse.

In a 2022 interview with Al Jazeera, Mohammed described her organisation’s efforts to support Iraqi women who survived violence at the hands of ISIS (ISIL), which had seized control of large swathes of the country.

“Muslim-Arab women who were enslaved by ISIL and have not found a place to go back to, they are still living in the shadows of the society,” she said at the time.

“Not less than 10,000 women were the victims of ISIL attack[s], and this femicide is not really acknowledged by the international community or dealt with in a way that keeps the dignity or the respect [of], or compensates, those who were the victims.”

Years of threats

Mohammed had been the target of death threats for decades, “aimed at dissuading her from defending women’s rights”, Front Line Defenders said. “Yet she remained defiant in the face of threats from ISIS and other armed groups.”

In 2016, she was awarded the Rafto Prize “for her tireless work for women’s rights in Iraq under extremely challenging conditions”.

The Rafto Foundation, the Norway-based nonprofit group that administers the award, said it was “deeply shaken” by her killing. “We are deeply shocked by this brutal attack on one of the most courageous human rights defenders of our time,” the foundation said in a statement.

“The assassination represents not only an attack on Yanar Mohammed as a person, but also on the fundamental values she dedicated her life to defending: women’s freedom, democracy, and universal human rights.”

Other activists and human rights groups also paid tribute to Mohammed this week, with Human Rights Watch describing her as “one of Iraq’s most courageous advocates for women’s rights” for more than two decades.

“Yanar was a dear colleague and friend to so many of us in the women’s rights and feminist community, one of our icons. She spent her life standing up for women’s rights in the most dangerous environment,” said Agnes Callamard, secretary-general of Amnesty International.

“She faced constant threats, but she never stopped. And today we cry and mourn her energy, her commitment, her profound humanity, her amazing courage.”