Who really controls Kurdistan’s gas? The Dana Gas deal, the KRG’s silence and the hidden cost of selling energy to Iraq

Image
By Dr. Pshtiwan Faraj | Kurdish Policy Analysis      A $2.239 billion arbitration settlement, a contract running until 2049, expanded rights for Pearl Petroleum and a new battle over gas sales to Baghdad are raising uncomfortable questions about who ultimately controls Kurdistan’s most strategic natural resource. The latest dispute over Khor Mor gas is exposing a much deeper problem in the Kurdistan Region’s energy sector: the public still does not appear to have a clear picture of who controls the region’s gas, who is authorized to sell it, and how much of its future value has already been committed to private companies. At the center of the controversy is Pearl Petroleum, the consortium led by Dana Gas and Crescent Petroleum, and a settlement agreement reached with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) on August 30, 2017. Kurdistan Parliament member Kawa Sheikh Ali has now sharply criticized that agreement, asking why a government would effectively commit its natural ...

Iranians Brace for Impact of Trump’s Threats to Target More Civilian Infrastructure

 More threats by Trump to destroy Iranian infrastructure are forcing civilians in Tehran to decide whether to stay or flee.



April 7 (Kurdish Policy Analysis) — Iranian civilians are weighing whether to flee the capital or shelter in place as U.S. President Donald Trump escalates threats to target infrastructure in the intensifying war, raising fears that ordinary people could bear the brunt of further strikes, according to accounts from inside the country and recent developments.

Residents in Tehran described a climate of mounting anxiety, with families debating evacuation amid warnings that power plants, bridges and other critical facilities could be hit in expanded U.S. operations. The threats have compounded an already fragile humanitarian situation after weeks of bombardment and retaliatory attacks across the region.

Trump has repeatedly warned that Iran could face sweeping attacks on infrastructure if it does not meet U.S. demands, including reopening key oil routes and curbing its nuclear ambitions. He has also suggested such strikes could accelerate regime change, despite international concern over civilian harm.

The rhetoric has sparked alarm among rights groups and foreign governments, who say targeting civilian infrastructure could violate international law. Critics, including U.S. lawmakers and Iran’s representatives, have condemned the threats as potentially amounting to war crimes.

On the ground, the impact is already visible. Airstrikes by U.S. and allied forces have damaged parts of Tehran and other cities, while internet disruptions, displacement and shortages of essential services deepen uncertainty for civilians.

Despite the risks, Trump has claimed — without providing evidence — that some Iranians would accept hardship from such attacks if it leads to political change, a position widely disputed by analysts and humanitarian organizations.

With diplomacy stalled and deadlines looming, residents say they are left to make impossible choices between safety and survival as the conflict edges closer to a wider escalation.

#IranWar #Tehran #Trump #MiddleEast #BreakingNews #WarCrisis #Geopolitics #CivilianImpact #USIran #GlobalTensions



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Lindsey Graham Passing Reshapes Republican Foreign Policy—and Raises Questions for the Kurds

Lindsey Graham's Death Leaves a Void in US-Kurdish Relations

Trump warns Iran: 'Pickaxe Mountain' nuclear site is next