Kurdistan's Interior Minister: Iran border threat eliminated
Shafaq News/ Iranian Kurdish opposition groups no longer pose a military or security threat along the shared border, Kurdistan Region Interior Minister Rebar Ahmed stated on Wednesday.
Ahmed confirmed to reporters that the joint high committee established by Iran, Iraq, and the Kurdistan Region had completed its mandate, emphasizing that bilateral relations have now reached a 'constructive and advanced stage.'
Addressing concerns over Iranian Kurdish opposition groups, he noted that 'appropriate measures' had been taken and 'these forces no longer represent a security or military threat along the shared border.'
In September 2023, the joint high committee overseeing the implementation of the Iraq-Iran security agreement announced the complete evacuation of camps and headquarters belonging to Iranian Kurdish opposition parties in the Kurdistan Region, in preparation for reclassifying them as refugees.
The disarmament deadline under the Iraq-Iran security pact expired on September 19, 2023. Iranian officials had earlier threatened military action against the groups if Baghdad failed to implement the terms.
About Kurdish Iranian Opposition
The Iranian Kurdish opposition comprises various political and armed movements advocating for Kurdish rights, many of which have been based in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. Below is a summary of the key groups:
• Kurdi stan Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI): Founded in 1945, led by Mustafa Hijri
• Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan: Founded in 1969, led by Abdullah Mohtadi
• Khabat (Or ganization of Iranian Kurdistan Struggle): Founded in 1980, led by Babashekh Hosseini
• Kurdistan Freedom Party (PAK): Founded in 1991, led by Hussein Yazdanpanah
• Free Life Party of Kurdistan (PJAK): Founded in 2004, led by Siamand Moeini and Zilan Vejin
Iran has also launched cross-border strikes targeting their facilities, with operations by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) involving missiles and drones. Tehran has accused these groups of contributing to unrest within its borders.
Earlier, the Kurdistan Regional Government stated that it does not permit any group to use its territory to threaten neighboring states.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Shafaq News
41 minutes ago
- Shafaq News
Tehran: No evidence of nuclear deviation
Shafaq News/ On Saturday, Iran asserted that its nuclear program remains peaceful, while its military intensified drone strikes on Israeli targets. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei told Alaraby TV that Tehran's nuclear activities are legal, affirming, 'There is no evidence we've deviated from peaceful aims.' Baqaei accused Israel of obstructing diplomacy, insisting that Iran remains committed to dialogue. 'We never left the table.' Defending Tehran's recent military operations, Baqaei framed them as responses to Israeli aggression, warning that any US intervention would trigger a reaction 'in line with international law.' He also urged neighboring governments not to ignore what he described as Israel's destabilizing role in the region. Separately, Iran's military confirmed it had launched dozens of 'suicide drones ' in what it labeled the seventh and eighth phases of its aerial campaign, adding, 'Most drones reached their targets.' Tensions have escalated sharply since June 13, when Iran and Israel began openly trading daily missile and drone strikes. Despite mounting international pressure for de-escalation, both sides continue to exchange fire across multiple fronts.
Shafaq News
41 minutes ago
- Shafaq News
Red Sea alert: Houthis to target US ships if Washington backs Israel
Shafaq News/ On Saturday, Yemen's Ansarallah (Houthis) threatened to target the US interests in the Red Sea if Washington supports Israeli military operations against Iran. 'If the US involves in an attack and aggression against Iran with the Israeli enemy, the armed forces will target its ships and warships in the Red Sea,' the group wrote on X. The Houthis described Israel as 'the aggressor against Iran,' referencing previous operations in Gaza and current attacks on Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen. It further accused Tel Aviv of seeking regional dominance, allegedly underwritten both openly and strategically by the United States. The movement explained that the objective of this project is to 'confiscate the freedom, independence, and dignity of our nation,' while also aiming to erode the region's identity, occupy land, exploit resources, and normalize violations of sacred sites and human life. The statement comes amid reports indicating that the United States is preparing to support Israel militarily in its confrontation with Iran. Tensions have sharply escalated following Israel's launch of Operation Rising Lion, a campaign of targeted strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites. The operation has killed several senior commanders from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and several key nuclear scientists. Iran responded with True Promise 3, its most extensive direct attack on Israeli territory to date. The retaliatory operation has so far included 18 waves of missile and drone strikes.
Shafaq News
41 minutes ago
- Shafaq News
Expert: Trump offers Iran 'One Last Chance'
Shafaq News/ Tensions between the United States and Iran are intensifying, and President Donald Trump's recent two-week deadline to Tehran has raised fresh questions about the possibility of renewed diplomacy—or the onset of military confrontation. In an exclusive interview with Shafaq News, Thomas Warrick, a Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council, offered key insights into what Trump's message truly means—and how Iran might respond. A Diplomatic Window, or a Final Warning? According to Warrick, the president's two-week deadline signals three distinct objectives: 'First, it's an opening to get diplomatic negotiations going with Tehran. Trump understands it will take time to bring Iran back to the table, but that's clearly his goal,' Warrick said. Secondly, Trump appears to be allowing time for additional US military assets to reach the region, enhancing the credibility of any threat of force. Warrick cited movements such as the USS Nimitz sailing toward the Arabian Sea and recent sightings of B-2 bombers likely headed toward Guam or Diego Garcia—capable platforms for delivering bunker-busting ordnance. The third element, Warrick noted, is political, 'He wants to show his base—and the world—that he's giving diplomacy one last chance before resorting to force. This is Trump trying to prove that any military action would only come after exhausting peaceful options.' A Flexible Deadline, Trump-Style When asked whether two weeks is enough to defuse the crisis, Warrick offered a nuanced perspective rooted in Trump's communication style. 'In Trump's language, 'two weeks' can mean anything. It could be three days, it could be never. There's a long history of him using this phrase ambiguously.' He added that Trump's spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, had delivered the deadline in the form of a direct presidential quote, implying it came straight from the Oval Office. 'It's a flexible deadline. Not too far removed from Arabic 'Inshallah' or Spanish 'mañana.' But still, this is a serious offer of diplomacy,' Warrick explained. Military Posturing as Pressure Trump's decision to bolster US forces in the region isn't just precautionary—it's strategic. 'Trump is all about leverage. He wants Iran to know that he's not bluffing,' Warrick said. 'The presence of aircraft carriers and bombers capable of striking hardened nuclear facilities like Fordow sends a clear message: if diplomacy fails, force is on the table.' However, Warrick emphasized that Trump would still prefer a negotiated outcome, calling it his 'first option.' Iran at a Crossroads When asked about Iran's likely response, Warrick presented a stark choice facing Tehran's leadership: 'Option one: negotiate, dismantle the nuclear program, and see crippling sanctions lifted. Option two: lose the nuclear program through military strikes—and still face sanctions.' He concluded that Iran's leaders must decide whether to preserve national dignity at great cost or accept a diplomatic deal that could ease decades of economic suffering. 'Either way, they lose the nuclear program. But only one path gives something back to the Iranian people. From that perspective, it's in their interest to take Trump's offer.'
