The Kurdistan Region has not fired a single shot at Iran. It has not hosted offensive military operations against Tehran. It has not provided a base for attacks on Iranian territory. Its government has pursued a consistent policy of diplomatic neutrality, careful engagement with all regional powers and deliberate restraint in the face of provocations that would have tested the patience of any administration. None of it has mattered. Iran bombs Erbil anyway.
Since the outbreak of the broader Iran-US conflict in late February 2026, the Kurdistan Region has recorded more than 950 drone and missile attacks launched by Iran and Iranian-backed armed groups, killing 32 people and wounding 154 others. By the time of publication that figure has exceeded 1,000. Erbil’s airport, energy facilities, residential areas, refugee camps and the offices of Kurdish political leaders have all been targeted. Iran has launched hundreds of attacks against Erbil airport, energy facilities and border villages under various pretexts.
The pretexts themselves reveal the cynicism of the Iranian position. Tehran has justified its strikes variously by citing the presence of US forces in Erbil, the offices of Iranian Kurdish opposition groups including the KDPI and Komala, alleged Israeli intelligence facilities and most recently as retribution for American military actions elsewhere in the region. On 2 September 2026 the IRGC launched a combined missile and drone strike on a US military base in Erbil, claiming it as direct retribution for a US strike on a wedding gathering in Sirik. The Kurdistan Region had nothing to do with that strike. It had no say in it. It was punished for it anyway.
What makes the Iranian position particularly difficult to defend is the frequency with which responsibility is either denied or obscured. Iranian-backed militias have repeatedly denied launching specific attacks even as Iranian state media and IRGC-affiliated outlets simultaneously claimed credit for the same strikes. After the latest attack, an Iranian-backed militia denied responsibility, claiming there was a partial agreement to stop attacks even as the strikes continued. The pattern is consistent and deliberate: attack, deny, claim credit selectively and repeat.
The Kurdistan Region has responded to this campaign not with retaliation but with diplomacy. Kurdish leaders have maintained channels of communication with Baghdad, Washington and regional powers simultaneously, calling for restraint and protection while refusing to be drawn into a conflict not of their making. That diplomatic posture is not weakness. It is a calculated and principled position from a government that understands its geographic reality surrounded by states with vastly superior military capacity and has chosen negotiation over provocation at every turn.
Which makes the question of what happens after 30 September 2026 all the more pressing. The United States has withdrawn the last five Patriot air defence systems from Erbil Airport and will complete the withdrawal of all remaining US military forces from the Kurdistan Region by September 30, 2026. Those Patriot systems were the primary shield against Iranian ballistic missiles and armed drones. The Kurdistan Region is urgently requesting advanced air defence systems to counter persistent drone and missile threats as the deadline approaches. That request has not yet been met.
The withdrawal creates a window of profound vulnerability. The US-led coalition forces that intercepted and destroyed hundreds of drones over Erbil throughout 2026 will no longer be there to do so. The Kurdistan Region’s own air defence capabilities, while improving, are not yet equipped to independently intercept the volume and sophistication of attacks Iran has demonstrated it is willing and able to launch. Coalition financial support for the Peshmerga will also cease post-withdrawal, transitioning solely to training, logistics and reform assistance.
Some analysts have argued that the removal of US forces eliminates Tehran’s primary pretext for targeting Erbil, that the presence of American personnel made the city a legitimate military target in Iran’s framing. That argument assumes good faith on Iran’s part. The history of Iranian strikes on Erbil does not support that assumption. Tehran targeted the UAE consulate in Erbil. It targeted the offices of Kurdish political leaders. It struck a refugee camp housing Iranian Kurdish families. These are not the actions of a state that requires a genuine military justification before it fires.
The Kurdistan Region is a government of diplomats caught in a war fought by others. Its leaders have done everything that international norms demand of a responsible regional actor of neutrality. They have been bombed more than a thousand times for their trouble. The least the international community owes them is the air defence systems they have asked for before the last American Patriot battery leaves Erbil’s skies.
