Abstract: This paper focuses on the "disputes concerning the Gulf Ban on flights" caused by the closure of airspace by several Gulf States against a specific State, and discusses the differences in the interpretation and application of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention) and the International Air Services Transit Agreement (Transit Agreement) of 1944 on the basis of identifying disputes over procedural and substantive issues between the parties involved. In terms of procedural issues, it is pointed out that the Council of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are entitled to exercise their jurisdiction over the disputes, and there are no circumstances in the current disputes that preclude the application of the Chicago Convention. As for airspace closure, although four of the Gulf States are entitled to close their airspace based on the principle of airspace sovereignty, their closure is suspected of violating rules concerning prohibited areas under the Chicago Convention and the obligation "not to misuse international civil aviation". With regard to transit rights, whether three of the Gulf States are entitled under the Transit Agreement to revoke or withhold Qatar 's transit rights depends on the extent to which Qatar Airways complies with the laws and regulations of these three of the Gulf States.