European skies are quietly being redrawn. In early 2026, the Netherlands joined France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal and a growing list of European states whose airlines are now avoiding Iranian airspace after a series of conflict zone warnings from the European Union Aviation Safety Agency. The move, shaped by rising regional tensions and the risk of military miscalculation, is already reshaping long haul itineraries between Europe, Asia and the Middle East and is expected to remain in place at least until the end of the first quarter of 2026.
From Advisory to Widespread Avoidance
The latest shift traces back to fresh guidance from the European Union Aviation Safety Agency in mid January 2026, when regulators issued a new Conflict Zone Information Bulletin covering Iran’s Tehran Flight Information Region. The bulletin urged EU regulated carriers and EASA authorised non European operators not to operate in Iranian airspace at any altitude, citing a heightened state of alert among Iranian air defence forces and an increased likelihood of misidentification of civil aircraft.
In practice, that advisory accelerated an avoidance pattern that was already emerging. Major European airlines, sensitive to both regulatory expectations and public concern in the wake of several high profile conflict zone incidents over the past decade, began to route around Iran even before formal restrictions came into effect. The Netherlands’ flag carrier KLM, which had previously used Iranian corridors on some Asia bound routes, confirmed in January that it would stop transiting both Iranian and much of the surrounding airspace, including Iraq and parts of the Gulf, as a precautionary measure.
By February, the Netherlands had effectively aligned with France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal and other European states whose carriers were now routinely avoiding Iranian skies. While each airline technically makes its own operational decisions, the combined effect is a de facto regional consensus: Iran is no longer part of the standard route map between Europe and key destinations across South and East Asia.
Security Risks Behind the Decision
The underlying concern is not everyday air traffic control in Iran but the military overlay. EASA and national authorities point to a combination of advanced air defence systems, volatile regional politics and the possibility of rapid US or allied military action as a dangerous mix for civil aviation. When state militaries are on high alert, there is a greater risk that an unidentified radar return or misinterpreted manoeuvre could be mistaken for a hostile act.
The advisory language focuses on the risk of misidentification. Iranian forces, anticipating possible attacks on strategic sites, are believed to be operating with shortened decision timelines and a wide range of surface to air missile capabilities. In such an environment, a commercial aircraft following its planned route can, in the worst case, be seen as a threat if communications are misunderstood or if the aircraft’s profile resembles that of a military asset. The European guidance stresses that this risk applies across all flight levels, not just at lower altitudes.
Adding to that is the possibility of sudden closures. In January, Iranian authorities briefly shut the country’s airspace in response to a perceived threat of US action, leaving airlines with little time to adjust. The European regulator noted that closures of this kind, implemented without advance notice, can trap aircraft in complex diversion patterns or force en route rerouting that increases cockpit workload at moments when crews most need predictability.
For aviation safety specialists in Europe, these factors combine into an unacceptable risk profile. Operators are advised not only to avoid Iran itself but also to apply extra caution in neighbouring airspace, particularly in states hosting US military facilities that could become targets if tensions escalate further.
How Dutch and European Carriers Are Rerouting
On the ground, the Netherlands’ decision translates directly into new route maps. Amsterdam Schiphol, as one of Europe’s major intercontinental hubs, has long relied on efficient eastbound corridors across the Middle East to connect North America and Europe with India, Southeast Asia and parts of China. With Iranian airspace off limits, flight planners are redrawing tracks to the north and south, threading between other conflict advisories and airspace constraints.
For some Asia routes, this means shifting north over Turkey, the Caucasus and Central Asia, skirting Iranian and Iraqi skies altogether. Other services are being pushed further south, using corridors over Saudi Arabia and the Arabian Sea when available and assessed as safe. KLM is far from alone in this. German, French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese carriers are implementing similar rerouting on flights that once cut more directly across the heart of the Middle East.
The immediate consequences are tangible. Flight times on certain Amsterdam Asia sectors have increased by 30 minutes to more than an hour, depending on winds and the exact routing, with corresponding rises in fuel burn and crew duty times. Airlines are building in additional contingency fuel and reviewing schedules for potential knock on delays, especially in tightly banked hub operations where a single late arrival can disrupt a wave of onward connections.
Despite the operational and financial pressures, European carriers have publicly framed the changes as non negotiable from a safety perspective. Dutch authorities have echoed that view, underlining that commercial considerations cannot override a shared risk assessment that identifies Iranian airspace as unsafe in the current climate.
Impact on Travelers and Ticket Prices
For passengers, the most immediate impact is on journey time. Travelers flying from the Netherlands or other European countries to destinations such as Bangkok, Singapore, Delhi or Kuala Lumpur may notice slightly longer scheduled times and revised flight paths shown on onboard maps. In some cases, redeployed aircraft types and rescheduled departures are altering the timing of connections in Amsterdam and other hubs, prompting rebooking or longer layovers.
These adjustments feed into costs. Longer routes mean more fuel, and extended crew hours can trigger higher staffing expenses and more complex rostering. While airlines rarely detail the cost impact of individual geopolitical disruptions, industry analysts expect that sustained avoidance of Iranian airspace through at least the end of the first quarter of 2026 will contribute to upward pressure on fares, particularly on already busy Europe Asia corridors.
Travelers may also see more frequent last minute changes. With the security situation in the broader region still fluid, airlines are retaining flexibility to adjust routings or, in some cases, suspend services entirely if risk assessments shift. Dutch travelers connecting via the Middle East are already feeling this in the form of cancelled or consolidated flights, especially where services rely on overflight of multiple sensitive regions such as Iran, Iraq and parts of the Eastern Mediterranean.
At the same time, there is a psychological dimension. For some passengers, the knowledge that their flight will avoid certain conflict zones offers reassurance and may even become a factor in airline choice. Others may view the constant stream of advisories and reroutings as evidence of a more unstable world, adding a new layer of concern to long haul travel planning.
Wider European Context and Policy Coordination
The Netherlands’ move slots into a broader European framework that has evolved since several tragic incidents involving civil aircraft over or near conflict zones. In recent years, the EU has strengthened mechanisms for sharing threat assessments among member states, regulators and operators, culminating in a conflict zone alerting system that issues coordinated bulletins and information notes.
In 2025, as hostilities flared between Iran and Israel and missile strikes affected military targets across the region, EASA published conflict zone bulletins that highlighted the risk of miscalculation in both Iranian and neighbouring airspace. Although some of those earlier notices were later downgraded to information notes as a ceasefire took hold, the underlying message was clear: airspace in politically volatile regions can shift from safe to unsafe within hours, and civil aviation must err on the side of caution.
The fresh warnings in January and February 2026 represent a re escalation in concern focused squarely on Iran. Importantly, they also reinforce the principle of joint action. National regulators in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands are working from the same core assessment, even as each state retains final authority over its airlines. That coordination helps avoid a patchwork of standards where some carriers continue to fly routes deemed unsafe by others, which can confuse travelers and create competitive distortions.
For the travel industry, this alignment offers a measure of clarity. Tour operators, corporate travel managers and online agencies can plan based on the assumption that Iranian airspace will remain off limits for most European carriers through at least the end of March 2026, with discussions already pointing to a likely extension if regional tensions persist.
Alternatives for Reaching the Middle East and Asia
With Iran effectively off the map for European airlines, travelers and route planners are looking at alternatives. One immediate beneficiary is the northern corridor through Central Asia, used by a mix of European and Asian carriers looking to maintain east west connectivity without crossing Iranian or Iraqi skies. For journeys between Western Europe and destinations like India, Pakistan and Southeast Asia, this can mean more flights passing over the Caucasus, the Caspian Sea and Kazakhstan.
Another shift is toward southern routings that rely more heavily on Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean segments, occasionally incorporating stopovers in Gulf states when assessed as safe. This has created a complex balancing act, as some of the same tensions driving the Iran advisories also affect risk calculations for parts of the wider Gulf region. Airlines and regulators are conducting granular, route by route analysis, weighing the relative risks and adjusting flight plans as intelligence and diplomatic signals evolve.
For Dutch travelers, the result is a changing map of recommended connections. Where a direct or single stop itinerary via a Middle Eastern hub might once have been the obvious choice for reaching certain Asian cities, itineraries that connect through northern European or Central European hubs and then bypass Iran to the north are becoming more common. Some passengers are also turning to Asian or Gulf carriers whose home authorities apply different risk thresholds, though they too are subject to operational constraints and may reroute at short notice.
Rail and sea alternatives, while still niche for long distance travel between Europe and Asia, are periodically mentioned in sustainability discussions and may gain marginal interest among travelers wary of flying through complex conflict zones. For now, however, air travel remains the only realistic choice for most journeys, making the management of risk and routing all the more critical.
What Travelers Should Expect Through Q1 2026
Looking ahead to the end of the first quarter of 2026, the working assumption in the European aviation community is that Iranian airspace will remain effectively off limits for EU carriers. The current advisories are set to run at least into March, and officials have indicated that any easing would depend on a clear and sustained reduction in regional tensions, as well as evidence that the risks of misidentification and sudden airspace closures have receded.
For travelers from the Netherlands and other European countries, this translates into several practical expectations. Eastbound flights will continue to feature longer routings, with schedules and block times adjusted accordingly. Airlines will maintain contingency plans for further diversions or temporary suspensions if the situation deteriorates, and short notice updates will remain a feature of travel in and around the Middle East.
Passengers booking long haul journeys that would traditionally have crossed Iran should plan with extra time buffers, particularly when self connecting between separate tickets or carriers. Travel insurance policies that cover disruption due to political events and airspace closures may become more relevant, and passengers are advised to review the fine print on what constitutes a covered event.
At the same time, the industry’s experience in managing conflict zone routing over the past decade has given airlines and regulators a more robust toolbox of procedures. From real time intelligence sharing and satellite tracking to harmonised European advisories, the systems now in place are designed to ensure that safety decisions like the current avoidance of Iranian airspace are made early and consistently. For travelers, that should mean fewer surprises, even if the skies over parts of the world remain more complicated than ever.