The Najaf flight bargain begins on the ground

The ground services that stopped the flights

For a traveller bound for Najaf, the loss of an air connection meant an overland journey lasting at least 12 hours. Iraq’s newly announced exemption permits Iranian airlines to operate up to 40 daily flights to and from Najaf, excluding Mahan Air. The decision changing that traveller’s route also reveals where the sanction operates: even if an aircraft can reach Iraq, a flight depends on a functioning chain of services on the ground.^[1]

After the US Treasury sanctioned 36 entities linked to Iranian aviation on September 8, foreign ground handlers stopped serving Iranian carriers. Iraq’s ambassador in Tehran, Yasser al-Hajjaj, says Baghdad did not order the flights suspended. That sequence suggests how a sanction can take effect without another government issuing its own flight ban. The service provider’s exposure to sanctions is passed on to the traveller as a transport cost.^[1]

The route opened for Najaf

Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi’s office announced the Najaf arrangement as an exemption obtained through direct talks with Washington. Services to Baghdad, Erbil and Sulaymaniyah remain suspended. The designated airport and the exclusion of Mahan Air belong in the same reading: the bargain permits services to resume for one destination while preserving pressure on other carriers and routes. Its scope is drawn at the level of an airport and an airline.^[1]

Najaf is an important gateway for visitors to the shrine of Imam Ali. Iran’s ambassador in Baghdad, Mohammad Kazem al-Sadegh, says Iranian carriers operated about 25 daily flights to Najaf before the disruption. The new ceiling of 40 is above that diplomat’s estimate of earlier services, but using the ceiling requires operating decisions and service capacity. An alternative to interpreting the exemption as commercial expansion is that it opens a specified route for religious visitors and patients.^[1]

How the permission reaches the passenger

In my reading, the traveller forced onto an overland route makes the cost of this bargain clearest. A journey lasting at least 12 hours is the final link in an effect beginning with a service company. The resumption of Najaf flights can reduce that burden on this route; travellers dependent on other Iraqi airports still face disruption. Pilgrimage needs can also explain why the decision centres on Najaf. The handlers’ sanctions concerns and Baghdad’s reason for seeking an exemption therefore need not share a single cause.^[1]

The practical counterpart of the agreement is ground service for eligible airlines on the Najaf route and passengers being able to fly again. If the announced daily ceiling becomes operating flights, the reduction in the travel burden can be observed. The separate position of Baghdad, Erbil and Sulaymaniyah keeps the bargain’s boundary visible. When assessing sanctions power, I would examine which carrier receives ground service at which airport alongside the permitted flight ceiling: that is where an interstate agreement reaches the passenger.^[1]