Iran Has Warned Neighbouring Countries That Blocking Its Flights Could Put Their Own Airports At Risk.
Iran Has Warned Neighbouring Countries That Blocking Its Flights Could Put Their Own Airports At Risk.
Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, made the threat in an interview with Iranian state television on Wednesday, 23 September. He said that if neighbouring countries cooperated with the United States by stopping Iranian flights, Iran would ensure their airports could not function, according to Reuters.
The warning followed a separate announcement from US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. He said on Monday that providers of aviation services to Iranian airlines would face the threat of secondary sanctions from 23 September. The confrontation puts regional governments and aviation businesses between American economic pressure and an explicit Iranian threat.
There is no verified indication in the reporting that Iran has carried out the airport threat. Rezaei did not, in the account available, identify a particular airport, country, method or deadline for an attack. Those omissions matter: this is a serious warning from a senior security official, but it is not evidence that a specific airport closure or strike is imminent.
Why Is Iran Making This Threat Now?
The immediate trigger is Washington’s effort to stop Iranian airlines operating internationally by pressuring the companies that keep flights running. An airline needs more than an aircraft and a destination: it relies on ground handling, fuel, maintenance, payments, airport access and permission to use airspace. A provider that fears US sanctions may refuse a service even if the host government has issued no formal flight ban.
That gives the American measure potential reach beyond US territory. It also explains why Tehran is addressing its neighbours. Rezaei’s statement is an attempt to raise the perceived cost of complying with Washington, particularly for countries whose airports serve regional connections.
An Iranian carrier losing access to an overseas airport is one outcome. A neighbouring country’s wider aviation network being disrupted is another, far more consequential outcome. Rezaei’s words seek to connect the two, although his statement alone establishes neither the capability nor the intention to carry out a particular operation.
What Does This Mean For Travellers?
Passengers should distinguish an airline cancellation from an airport shutdown. Individual flights can be withdrawn because of sanctions exposure, commercial decisions, airspace restrictions or security concerns while the destination airport remains open for other carriers.
Travellers booked on an affected route should rely on their airline and the relevant airport for the status of their specific flight. A general threat, however alarming, does not establish that every route through the region has been suspended.
The practical risks can also spread without a direct attack. If airlines decide that a route has become unsafe or difficult to service, they may reroute aircraft, reduce schedules or cancel connections. Those decisions can strand passengers well beyond the countries directly involved. The degree of disruption will depend on what service providers and governments actually do after the US sanctions deadline.
A Dangerous Pressure Point During Diplomatic Talks
The threat comes as Washington and Tehran are also discussing a possible route out of their wider conflict. A senior Iranian official told Reuters on Tuesday that Iran could reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days if the US eased military pressure and lifted its blockade of Iranian ports. That was a conditional proposal, not an agreement.
The aviation dispute illustrates why a diplomatic opening does not immediately reduce every regional risk. Washington can increase economic pressure while discussing a settlement. Iranian officials can signal willingness to negotiate while threatening retaliation against countries they consider to be assisting the US campaign. Neighbouring states must respond to both messages at once.
The crucial next evidence will be concrete: which Iranian flights are cancelled, whether any government formally bars them, whether service providers withdraw support, and whether Tehran takes any action beyond Rezaei’s statement. Until then, “Iran threatens airports” is the verified development. “Regional airports have been paralysed” would be a different and currently unsupported claim.
