Menu
Latest
Menu
Latest
Analysis

Iran plunges into the Karabakh crisis

28 October 2020
Noman Ahmed

Iran has plunged into the current Karabakh crisis, saying it has an initiative to help stop the ongoing war between Armenia and Azerbaijan.The Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs of Iran, Abbas Araghchi, is due to visit Baku, Moscow, Yerevan and Ankara where is expected to unveil the so-called Iranian plan. 

"In this regional trip, I will introduce the initiative presented by the Islamic Republic of Iran regarding the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis", the Iranian news agency IRNA quoted the Deputy Minister as saying after he inspected the Iranian border with the two countries prior to his departure on the mission. "Iran seeks lasting peace in the region, and in this visit to the countries involved in the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis I will consult, and I hope the plan of the Islamic Republic of Iran will contribute to lasting peace in the region."

Commenting on the diplomatic move, Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Javad Zarif said "Iran's plan for a permanent solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has been formulated and will be presented today and tomorrow with the approval of the country's top officials".

Commonspace.eu Middle East Analyst, Noman Ahmed has been monitoring the Iranian response to the ongoing Karabakh War. In this analysis he says that Iran is keen to reduce  the risks and the costs for itself of this bitter conflict. The new Iranian shuttle diplomacy and plan are intended to do that first and foremost. He adds:

Officially Iran takes the position of most of the international community, and the government remained neutral. Historically however it has built more warm ties with Armenia than with its Shia neighbour, Azerbaijan, due to several political and economic reasons. Despite sharing the same religion (Islam)and sect (Shia), the Azeri and Persians are of different ethnic, linguistic and cultural background. Iran amasses several ethnicities including the Azeris who reside in the northern provinces of Ardabil, East Azerbaijan and West Azerbaijan just shy of the Azerbaijani sovereign territory. 

However, since the beginning of October, Iran has, for the first time, supported the Azerbaijani side, apparently in response to protestors who took to the streets in these three provinces and showed solidarity with their Azeri brothers chanting "Karabakh is ours". Both the government and religious leaders in these provinces reiterated Iranian unity and solidarity for the Azeris in fear of backlash from the Azeri community inside Iran. Those protestors are likely to be from the same community who over the last weeks have gathered daily to watch the fighting from the other bank of the Aras river and cheer Azerbaijani soldiers as they advanced into Nagorno Karabakh.

After calling for Azerbaijani territorial integrity, and mobilising its religious institution for the cause of Azerbaijan, protesters in Tabriz still demanded more. Last weekend protestors called for Iran to shut its border with Armenia. The slogans asserted the unity of Azerbaijan and denounced Iran's support for Armenia, according to VOA Azerbaijan. The protestors also demanded the release of activists detained in earlier protests in northern Iranian provinces. The Iranian government did not respond yet to this second wave of protests.

National unity is not the only concern for Iran. More than 50 rockets, a drone and several incidents of stray fire hit Iranian territory resulting in an increased state of readiness and mobilisation of security apparatus near the border. The Iranian Foreign Ministry has throughout the last month issued several warnings, and a second drone was downed by Iran in East Azerbaijan province.  

A third challenge for Iran, which it has discussed with all concerned parties, and with Russia and Turkey as well, is the presence of foreign fighters at a close proximity of its borders. It is not clear what exact number of foreign fighters are in Nagorno Karabakh, but recruitment is active according to various sources. There are also reports of some of some foreign non-civilians deaths.

Iran, therefore, had to be active diplomatically even if the Russians and Turks do not consider it a neutral, effective broker. Iran has vocalised its concern to Turkey and Russia and hoped they would address the issue of foreign fighters. Mohammad Farazmand, ambassador of Iran in Ankara, said "For this reason, we do not want conflict and instability in the region; Therefore, efforts should be made to resolve this issue through fair solutions." Iran does not want a conflict near its borders, and doesn't want the conflict to spill over in its territories, even by accident.

Internally, Iran needs to manage rising Azeri activism in its own territories but still maintain sufficient neutrality to be part of the peace process in which it could amplify its concerns over terrorism and border security. Iranian writers in the local media seem to be divided. Some believe that Iran should take a bigger role in establishing peace saying that it had historically been "a custodian of the Caucasus" and managed to govern it despite Russian and Ottoman influences. They also believe Azeris should be supported as Muslims, ignoring Azerbaijan's secular identity. 

Others believe Iran needs to avoid being embroiled in the conflict and adhere to strict neutrality. The latter argue that Nagorno Karabakh is not a Persian territory and that the Azeris will never accept the Iranian system of political leadership and neither should Iran stand by a pro-Turkish side. This has also been the position of the opposition group known as the National Front who denounced the voices of religious leaders in support of Azerbaijan.

For the Iranian regime, addressing the Nagorno Karabakh is easier said than done. The situation in Nagorno Karabakh can be catastrophic for Iran. The 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war is likely to have collateral damage across the wider South Caucasus and and beyond, and Iran is keen to reduce to the risks and the costs of this bitter conflict. The new Iranian shuttle diplomacy and plan are intended to do that first and foremost.

Source: Noman Ahmed is the Middle East analyst at commonspace.eu

Photo: An Iranian flag is pictured near in a missile during a military drill, with the participation of Iran’s Air Defense units, Iran October 19, 2020. WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS

 

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?
Trending

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

19 October 2026
Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Dennis Sammut
Editor's choice
News
Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security
Trending

Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security

13 November 2026
Ukraine and Russia could see European countries join the next round of peace negotiations, following talks between US special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Thursday (November 12). However, conflicting positions over European military involvement, Ukraine’s territorial future and the continent’s security arrangements highlight the difficulties facing the diplomatic process. Speaking after the meeting, Witkoff said European participation would be an important development, describing the countries concerned as key partners. Kushner also indicated that Washington had noticed a shift in European attitudes and believed their involvement would not obstruct progress. In a statement published on X, he said the expanded discussions would address broader European security arrangements alongside territorial disputes between Russia and Ukraine. The US envoys subsequently travelled to Dublin, where they met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a European summit. Zelenskyy welcomed the possibility of European participation and expressed hope that the negotiations would include measures to reduce tensions and establish ceasefires. He also reiterated the importance of European representation in decisions concerning the continent’s security. Moscow, however, has offered a more cautious interpretation of the proposed expansion. Putin's aide, Yuri Ushakov, suggested that European countries should first reconsider their military assistance to Kyiv, arguing that their current actions demonstrated an unwillingness to pursue peace. Putin similarly called on Washington to work with its European allies to establish whether they genuinely wanted peace or continued confrontation with Russia. The Russian president also rejected the prospect of European peacekeeping troops being deployed to Ukraine following a potential agreement, describing such a presence as a continuation of the war. His position reflects wider disagreements over the future European security architecture, with Moscow seeking discussions on the continent's broader security arrangements, while European leaders insist that such negotiations cannot replace a settlement of the war. Simultaneously, Zelenskyy raised concerns about disruptions to Starshield, the US-made satellite communications service used by Ukrainian forces. He described Washington’s discussions with Moscow about Europe's future security as unusual and warned against decisions that could undermine Ukraine's sovereignty. Despite the diplomatic activity, fighting continued. Russian drone attacks killed two people in Ukraine's Sumy region and injured five in Rivne, while a separate attack in Russia's Belgorod region killed one person and injured four. Ukrainian agricultural company Kernel Holding also suspended operations at all its oilseed extraction facilities following repeated Russian attacks.

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest
Trending

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

7 September 2026
Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Dennis Sammut
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”
Trending

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

21 September 2026
There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)
Dennis Sammut