Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary said today that the Irish low-cost airline might not resume Israel flights even after the war in Gaza ends. He said, “I think there’s a real possibility that we won’t bother going back to Israel when the current violence recedes, We are tired of being messed around by the Israel Airports Authority. Unless the Israelis kind of get their act together and stop messing us around, frankly, we have far more growth elsewhere in Europe.”
O’Leary’s comments put in question whether Ryanair will renew Israel flights as planned at the end of October.
Even before the summer, Ryanair said it would not return to Israel before October 25 at the earliest. In recent remarks, O’Leary has hinted that the temporary suspension of flights could become a permanent exit from the Israeli market.
During the war, Ryanair demanded the reopening of Terminal 1 at Ben Gurion airport as a condition for renewing flights, due to the lower fees and costs compared with Terminal 3. Even though Terminal 1 has since reopened, the airline now has additional grievances against the Israel Airports Authority.
Aviation market sources believe that the Israel Airports Authority is demanding a long-term commitment, beyond acceptable terms in the industry, in order to continue keeping Terminal 1 open, and that this is the reason for Ryanair’s remarks.
Stricter demands for Terminal 1
A letter seen by “Globes” last week indicates that the criteria for allocating flight slots for taking off and landing at Terminal 1 exceed the aviation industry norm worldwide and could affect competition between airlines.
According to accepted international regulations (WASG – Worldwide Airport Slot Guidelines), slots are allocated to companies according to uniform principles, regardless of the terminal in which they operate. However, according to IATA, on whose behalf the letter was sent to the Airports Authority, a gap has been created at Ben Gurion Airport: at Terminal 3, continuous operation of a route for ten weeks is required to receive slots for the season, while at Terminal 1 the requirements are much stricter – 20 weeks in the summer or 14 weeks in the winter
Ryanair is not a member of IATA, but it is possible that O’Leary’s statement was influenced, among other things, by the Israel Airports Authority’s excessive requirements, which stem from operational considerations: Terminal 1 is a small facility and is particularly sought after due to its low operating costs, and therefore requires a long-term continuity of activity and fixed targets to ensure stability and maximize usage. The Israel Airports Authority believes that adjustments are allowed at any airport. “If a company wants to, it can always enter Terminal 3,” says Ben Gurion Airport Director Udi Bar-Oz
RELATED ARTICLES
Ryanair offers low fares from Tel Aviv for November
Wizz Air wants to operate Israel hub from April 2026
London loses its lustre for Israeli tourists
In its letter, IATA rejected this explanation and claimed that these are discriminatory criteria that do not meet global standards and could create an anti-competitive effect. According to them, the tightening of the requirements mainly harms companies that operate seasonal routes (such as Ryanair) or new companies entering the market, which cannot commit to long-term operating schedules.
The Israel Airports Authority rejected the claims of discrimination or harm to competition. They claim that the difference in costs between Terminal 1 and Terminal 3 amounts to only about $17 per passenger – an amount that is passed on to passengers and is not a critical consideration.
Anti-Israel sentiment
Ryanair is known as a low-cost carrier, which does not hesitate to renew and cancel routes according to commercial considerations. Over the past two years, the company has extended the cancellations of flights to Israel, sometimes for extremely long periods of time, and has not rushed to resume operations even during periods of relative calm.
This is not the first time that Ryanair’s CEO has been disgruntled by Israel. Last May, O’Leary also said that the company was losing patience with the disruptions to flights to Israel, and would prefer to divert planes to other, safer destinations. Although this is a company driven primarily by profitability considerations, public sentiment in Ireland may be a major factor in its decision not to resume flights to Israel. Over the years, the company has repeatedly sparked controversy over the way it presents Israel in its booking system. in February 2024, it was reported that the website had added the option to choose the “occupied Palestinian territories” as a residence for passengers, a move that at the time aroused sharp public criticism in Israel.
Published by Globes, Israel business news – en.globes.co.il – on September 11, 2025.
© Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd., 2025.
