By Payraw Anwar
The Middle East has once again entered a period of renewed turmoil and instability. Regional and international actors have resumed direct confrontation, raising concerns about a broader regional conflict. Following the conclusion of a 12-day confrontation between Israel and Iran last year, a second round of hostilities appears to have emerged, involving both regional and global powers.
In the most recent escalation, the United States and Israel reportedly launched attacks against Iranian military infrastructure. According to various reports, the strikes targeted missile defense systems, military bases, and drone facilities. The attacks allegedly resulted in the deaths of several senior military and political figures within Iran’s leadership structure and caused significant damage to strategic military assets.
In response, Iran launched missile attacks toward several Gulf states, including Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Saudi Arabia, despite these countries not being directly involved in the conflict. The escalation has resulted in thousands of casualties and has raised serious concerns about the potential expansion of the conflict across the region.
Indicators show that Iran’s military capabilities have been significantly affected, including damage to its missile stockpiles and defense infrastructure. At the same time, uncertainty within Iran’s political leadership has increased, as no new supreme leadership structure has yet been consolidated. This apparent power vacuum in the country’s decision-making system may further complicate the political and military dynamics of the conflict.
Meanwhile, neighboring states have expressed growing concern regarding attacks on civilian and commercial infrastructure. I believe that the strategic objective of the United States and Israel may extend beyond military deterrence to include potential political transformation or regime change within Iran. Additionally, Israel has intensified military operations against Iran-aligned armed groups in Lebanon, a move that many observers believe could further destabilize the regional political order.
-The Kurdistan Region’s Stance During the War
At the onset of the conflict, Iran launched missile attacks targeting the Kurdistan Region, despite the region not being a party to the conflict. As a constitutionally recognized federal region within Iraq, the Kurdistan Region has traditionally maintained balanced diplomatic relations with both regional and international actors.
Notably, all five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council maintain diplomatic representation in Erbil through consulates, reflecting the region’s strategic diplomatic engagement. The Kurdistan Region has consistently sought to maintain neutrality and avoid alignment with any party involved in the conflict.
During the past week, however, U.S. missile defense systems deployed in the region intercepted more than 100 Iranian missiles and drones. These attacks were not only carried out directly by Iran but were also launched by Iran-backed militias operating from other areas of Iraq, including Mosul.
This situation has created a complex security environment within Iraq. The country appears to be experiencing attacks from different directions: the federal government in Baghdad faces pressure from U.S. and Israeli operations targeting militia networks, while the Kurdistan Region has been targeted by Iranian strikes and militia activities.
This hybrid security environment highlights two critical issues:
First, Iraq continues to struggle with a lack of full sovereign control over armed actors within its territory. The presence of multiple militias capable of launching attacks under the influence of external regional powers demonstrates the central government’s difficulty in monopolizing the use of force and maintaining internal stability.
Second, the leadership of the Kurdistan Region has repeatedly emphasized that the region will not participate in conflicts between regional and global powers. Kurdish authorities have publicly affirmed their commitment to neutrality and have stressed that the Kurdistan Region seeks stability, dialogue, and peace in the broader Middle East.