Pilgrim flights delayed by Iran-Israel attacks arrive in Indonesia
June 30, 2025
JAKARTA – Two groups of Indonesian haj pilgrims have arrived home safely after being stranded for a day when their flights from Saudi Arabia were delayed following an escalation of armed conflict between Israel and Iran in the region.
The flights supposed to carry two groups of pilgrims from the Surabaya embarkation point in East Java were initially canceled following the temporary closure of the Muscat International Airport in Oman after an Iranian missile attack against the Al Udeid air force base in Doha, Qatar on the night of June 23.
The attack, serving as a retaliation against the United States' bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, prompted the closure of airspace in the region for a few hours, with several airlines canceling their flights and airports being closed, including in Muscat.
The pilgrims were initially scheduled to fly home from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia on June 24, but had to spend more time in the city. Indonesian officials sent the stranded pilgrims to seven transit hotels in Jeddah.
The first group, SUB 43 consisting 380 pilgrims, finally left Jeddah on the evening of June 25, following a ceasefire deal between Iran and Israel that was first announced by US President Donald Trump.
Meanwhile the flight for the second group, called SUB 44, which also has 30 pilgrims, took off on the morning of June 26.
'The [two groups] whose flights were delayed have arrived home. The pilgrims have been reuniting with their families,' the Religious Affairs Ministry's domestic haj service director Muhammad Zain said in a statement on Friday.
Separately, Religious Affairs Minister Nasaruddin Umar said the recent escalated tension in the Middle East had only affected the two flights carrying pilgrims to Surabaya. He asserted that flights carrying Indonesian pilgrims back home are operating without any issues now.
'Hopefully the ceasefire lasts until our last pilgrims return home, because they would pass over the Qatari airspace, which is safe to be passed through now,' the minister said in Jakarta on Saturday, as quoted by Kompas.com.
The intensified conflict became the backdrop of this year's haj, which saw over 1.4 million pilgrims around the world visiting Saudi Arabia for the pilgrimage, a mandatory once-in-a-lifetime trip for every able-bodied Muslim who can afford it.
More than 200,000 of the 1.4 million pilgrims came from Indonesia, which has been given the largest haj quote by the Saudi government.
Indonesian pilgrims were split into 525 flight groups departing from 14 embarkation points across the country, including Jakarta, Surabaya, Medan in North Sumatra and Makassar in South Sulawesi.
According to the Religious Affairs Ministry, the return for Indonesian pilgrims is split into two waves: The first wave left Saudi Arabia from Jeddah between June 11 and 25, followed by the second wave from Madinah between June 26 and July 11.
The departure of SUB 44 from Jeddah marked the end for the Jeddah wave. As of Friday, more than 108,000 pilgrims under 280 flight groups had returned to Indonesia. The ministry also recorded 92 Indonesian pilgrims still hospitalized in Saudi hospitals and 26 others treated in Indonesian haj clinics for various illnesses.
Hilman Latief, the Religious Affairs Ministry's director general for haj and umrah, urged pilgrims who are still in Saudi Arabia to follow local regulations and procedures from Indonesian authorities during their remaining time in the Middle Eastern country.
'We still have much to do [until July 11], so I hope all Indonesian officials are still standing at the ready, despite the number of pilgrims having decreased significantly,' Hilman said in a statement issued on Friday.
Aside from the Muscat airport closure, the return trips for Indonesian pilgrims for this year's haj were also disrupted by bomb threats against two Saudi flights carrying pilgrims to Surabaya and Jakarta, which were forced to divert to Kualanamu International Airport in Medan on June 17 and 21.
The pilgrims from both flights were forced to stay overnight in Medan while police and military officers checked on the planes for a bomb. While security personnel did not find any explosive devices on either flight, authorities are still investigating the perpetrators behind the false threats.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
25 minutes ago
- Business Times
Trump says TikTok buyer group found, needs China nod
[WASHINGTON] President Donald Trump said he has identified a buyer for the US operations of TikTok, the social media app owned by Chinese company ByteDance, without naming the winning bidder. Completing a sale would be contingent on Beijing and President Xi Jinping's agreement, Trump added in a pre-taped interview on Fox New's Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo. ByteDance and the Chinese government have long opposed such a deal. 'We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way. I think I'll need probably China approval and I think President Xi will probably do it,' the US president said. 'It's a group of very wealthy people.' US and Chinese officials affirmed at the end of last week that they've agreed a trade framework, moving towards settling trade hostilities following talks in London earlier in June. ByteDance's US future has hung in the balance for years, starting with the first Trump administration putting pressure on the Beijing company to sell the asset to an American entity. A January deadline for ByteDance to find a local buyer was pushed back twice by Trump, who this month extended it again by a further 90 days from Jun 19. The US Congress passed a law last year requiring the divestiture, citing national security concerns. Under the law, the president was allowed to invoke one extension. But Trump has mused that TikTok in the US could be worth as much as one trillion US dollars and repeatedly shown a willingness to broker a deal. Movement on a sale had largely stalled as US-China trade ties frayed due to a larger clash over tariff negotiations. Before Trump announced widespread tariffs in April, a deal was said to be close, advanced by a consortium of US investors including Oracle, Blackstone and venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. The White House did not respond to a request for more details on Trump's latest remarks. When asked about the deal mentioned by Trump, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning told reporters at a regular press briefing in Beijing on Monday (Jun 30) that on TikTok-related issues, China 'has reiterated its principled position,' saying she had nothing further to add. Representatives from ByteDance and TikTok did not respond to requests for comment. BLOOMBERG
Straits Times
37 minutes ago
- Straits Times
US must rule out more strikes before talks can resume: Iran
Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi said diplomatic talks between Washington and Tehran cannot resume unless US rules out further strikes on Iran. PHOTO: REUTERS US must rule out more strikes before talks can resume: Iran Diplomatic talks between Washington and Tehran cannot resume unless the US rules out further strikes on Iran, its deputy foreign minister told the BBC late on J une 29 . Mr Majid Takht-Ravanchi told the British broadcaster that the US had signalled it wants to return to the negotiating table, a week after it struck three Iranian nuclear facilities. 'We have not agreed to any date, we have not agreed to the modality,' said the deputy foreign minister. 'Right now we are seeking an answer to this question. Are we going to see a repetition of an act of aggression while we are engaging in dialogue?' The US needed to be 'quite clear on this very important question,' he said. The two countries were in talks over Tehran's nuclear programme when Israel hit Iranian nuclear sites and military infrastructure earlier in June , with the US joining by bombing three nuclear sites – Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan – on June 21. Mr Takht-Ravanchi revealed to the BBC that the US had signalled it did 'not want to engage in regime change' by targeting Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. He also said Iran should still be allowed to enrich uranium. 'The level of that can be discussed, the capacity can be discussed, but to say that you should not have enrichment, you should have zero enrichment, and if you do not agree, we will bomb you, that is the law of the jungle,' he said. Israel claims that Iran's nuclear programme is close to producing a bomb, whereas Tehran says it is for peaceful purposes. It is not clear yet how much damage the strikes inflicted on Iran's nuclear facilities, which US President Donald Trump had said were 'totally obliterated'. UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said Iran would probably be able to begin to produce enriched uranium 'in a matter of months'. Mr Takht-Ravanchi said he did not know how long it would take. Under a 2015 deal, Iran was allowed to enrich uranium below 3.67 per cent purity for fuel for commercial nuclear power plants. Mr Trump abandoned the agreement in 2018 and Iran responded by producing uranium enriched to 60 per cent – above levels for civilian usage but still below weapons grade. That material, if further refined, would theoretically be sufficient to produce more than nine nuclear bombs. AFP Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
AsiaOne
41 minutes ago
- AsiaOne
Trump wins as Supreme Court curbs judges, but may yet lose on birthright citizenship, World News
WASHINGTON — The US Supreme Court's landmark ruling blunting a potent weapon that federal judges have used to block government policies nationwide during legal challenges was in many ways a victory for President Donald Trump, except perhaps on the very policy he is seeking to enforce. An executive order that the Republican president signed on his first day back in office in January would restrict birthright citizenship — a far-reaching plan that three federal judges, questioning its constitutionality, quickly halted nationwide through so-called "universal" injunctions. But the Supreme Court's ruling on Friday (June 27), while announcing a dramatic shift in how judges have operated for years deploying such relief, left enough room for the challengers to Trump's directive to try to prevent it from taking effect while litigation over its legality plays out. "I do not expect the president's executive order on birthright citizenship will ever go into effect," said Samuel Bray, a Notre Dame Law School professor and a prominent critic of universal injunctions whose work the court's majority cited extensively in Friday's ruling. Trump's executive order directs federal agencies to refuse to recognise the citizenship of children born in the United States who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also called a "green card" holder. The three judges found that the order likely violates citizenship language in the US Constitution's 14th Amendment. The directive remains blocked while lower courts reconsider the scope of their injunctions, and the Supreme Court said it cannot take effect for 30 days, a window that gives the challengers time to seek further protection from those courts. The court's six conservative justices delivered the majority ruling, granting Trump's request to narrow the injunctions issued by the judges in Maryland, Washington and Massachusetts. Its three liberal members dissented. The ruling by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who Trump appointed to the court in 2020, emphasised the need to hem in the power of judges, warning against an "imperial" judiciary. Judges can provide "complete relief" only to the plaintiffs before them, Barrett wrote. A host of policies That outcome was a major victory for Trump and his allies, who have repeatedly denounced judges who have impeded his agenda. It could make it easier for the administration to implement his policies, including to accelerate deportations of migrants, restrict transgender rights, curtail diversity and inclusion efforts, and downsize the federal government — many of which have tested the limits of executive power. In the birthright citizenship dispute, the ruling left open the potential for individual plaintiffs to seek relief beyond themselves through class action lawsuits targeting a policy that would upend the long-held understanding that the Constitution confers citizenship on virtually anyone born on US soil. Bray said he expects a surge of new class action cases, resulting in "class-protective" injunctions. "Given that the birthright-citizenship executive order is unconstitutional, I expect courts will grant those preliminary injunctions, and they will be affirmed on appeal," Bray said. Some of the challengers have already taken that path. Plaintiffs in the Maryland case, including expectant mothers and immigrant advocacy groups, asked the presiding judge who had issued a universal injunction to treat the case as a class action to protect all children who would be ineligible for birthright citizenship if the executive order takes effect. "I think in terms of the scope of the relief that we'll ultimately get, there is no difference," said William Powell, one of the lawyers for the Maryland plaintiffs. "We're going to be able to get protection through the class action for everyone in the country whose baby could potentially be covered by the executive order, assuming we succeed." The ruling also sidestepped a key question over whether states that bring lawsuits might need an injunction that applies beyond their borders to address their alleged harms, directing lower courts to answer it first. States challenge directive The challenge to Trump's directive also included 22 states, most of them Democratic-governed, who argued that the financial and administrative burdens they would face required a nationwide block on Trump's order. George Mason University constitutional law expert Ilya Somin said the practical consequences of the ruling will depend on various issues not decided so far by the Supreme Court. "As the majority recognises, states may be entitled to much broader relief than individuals or private groups," Somin said. New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin, a Democrat who helped lead the case brought in Massachusetts, disagreed with the ruling but sketched out a path forward on Friday. The ruling, Platkin said in a statement, "recognised that nationwide orders can be appropriate to protect the plaintiffs themselves from harm — which is true, and has always been true, in our case." Platkin committed to "keep challenging President Trump's flagrantly unlawful order, which strips American babies of citizenship for the first time since the Civil War" of 1861-1865. Legal experts said they expect a lot of legal manoeuvring in lower courts in the weeks ahead, and the challengers still face an uphill battle. Compared to injunctions in individual cases, class actions are often harder to successfully mount. States, too, still do not know whether they have the requisite legal entitlement to sue. Trump's administration said they do not, but the court left that debate unresolved. Meanwhile, the 30-day clock is ticking. If the challengers are unsuccessful going forward, Trump's order could apply in some parts of the country, but not others. "The ruling is set to go into effect 30 days from now and leaves families in states across the country in deep uncertainty about whether their children will be born as US citizens," said Elora Mukherjee, director of Columbia Law School's immigrants' rights clinic. [[nid:681341]]
