Menu
Latest
Menu
Latest
News

Iran struggles to forge a response to the Karabakh crisis

8 October 2020

Iran's place in the Caucasus is often forgotten, its role nearly always misunderstood. The current conflict brings war right to the borders of the Islamic Republic and risks adding internal tensions to an already tense internal political and ethnic situation. Some of the heaviest fighting in the last twelve days has been going on in the southern part of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone just across from the Aras River which provides a natural border. On Wednesday (7 October) Armenian sources that Azerbaijan was building up a large force on its side of the river, territory that had been regained in the last days of fighting. The fighting was so close to Iran that some Iranian villages were hit by ordinance that had gone astray. Azerbaijan moved swiftly to reassure Iran that it will do its utmost to avoid such incidents, and president Aliyev also spoke with president Rouhani where it is understood the same message was delivered.

Like Russia, Iran has a complicated and asymmetrical relationship with both Armenia and Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan shares with Iran a long history, a Shia tradition and extensive personal relations, not least because of the millions of ethnic Azerbaijanis living in northern Iran. Since Azerbaijan regained independence relations have often been tense, but in recent years, and especially under president Rouhani, Iran and Azerbaijan appear to have found a common language, and practical areas for co-operation in transport and economic spheres. Iran however has also maintained a very good relationship with Armenia, providing Armenia with its only land connection with the outside world, except for Georgia. The Armenian community in Iran is small but very well respected and well entrenched. For the Armenian leadership in Nagorno-Karabakh, Iran was often the most familiar face of the international community.

Iran does not want another war on its borders, and it is concerned the new situation will draw foreign troops (be they Russian, Turkish, European or American) closer to its border in the guise of peacekeepers. The Islamic Republic, constantly sensitive to the danger of encirclement, looks at this prospect with great trepidation.

Azerbaijani nationalism in Iran

Iranian Azeris reside in the border areas with Azerbaijan, Armenia and the current conflict zone. Signs of rising Azeri nationalism were already evident when Iranian Azeris took to the streets last week in support of Baku's position. Reflecting the concerns of Azeri nationalism, representatives of the Iranian religious leadership in north-western Iran issued statements last week confirming that "there is no doubt that Karabakh is Azerbaijani lands and that it is occupied and should return to Azerbaijan," reports the newspaper Al Araby. The Director of Seminaries, Ayatollah Alireza A'rafi, issued a similar statement on Sunday where he described Karabakh as "the cradle of great scholars throughout Shiite history", according to Mehr News.

Nationalism is not the only concern here as security plays another major role. In the past few days, several shells have landed in or near Iranian border towns, and local residents became worried with one resident killed. Several members of the national security and foreign policy committee of the Islamic Consultative Council and the Iranian Parliament visited the border area, Al Alem TV reported from Tehran. This visit aimed at examining the boundaries and disputes related to developments arising from the conflict and their implications at the border.

Both the Armenian and the Azerbaijani sides apologised for mortar shelling according to Iranian media sources. 

Iran's Deputy Police Chief Brigadier General Qassem Rezaei visited the country's northwestern borders in East Azerbaijan and Ardabil provinces on Wednesday,(7 October), after which he said Iranian border guards have full control over any moves in the northwestern borders of the country. Brigadier General Rezaei expressed hope Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict ends and peace returns to the borders of the two counties as soon as possible. The Islamic Republic of Iran is unhappy with the dispute between Baku and Yerevan and emphasizes the settlement of the dispute is realized behind the negotiating table and under the supervision of the UN, he noted. Iran's deputy police chief also warned saboteurs and terrorist groups not to abuse the Karabakh dispute.

An Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson said: "We hope the both sides would refrain from continuing war and violence, considering their historical responsibility, would carefully observe the main rights about non-aggression against civilians, and would also bear in mind that the Islamic Republic of Iran cannot tolerate clashes at its borders, specifically a violation of its territory".

Jalal Khoshchehreh, an Iranian writer says to Borna News Agency that: "The current war is of national and security importance to Iran because Iranians have been a collection of ethnicities and religions for thousands of years, and their most important characteristic is a true nation with cultural fusion". Iran does not want the fight to come close to its borders because of the "risk of infiltration by Salafists, ISIS and other destructive groups along Iran's northern borders".

Whilst Tehran has traditionally taken an interest in the Karabakh conflict, this time round it appears to be more vocal in support of the Azerbaijani political cause, yet carefully conceptualising its border as a redline and a matter of top security. Tehran's engagement may be necessary from the perspective of the leadership of the Islamic Republic as clashes are just few miles away from its borders. Tehran is keen on presenting itself as an honest broker for peace, yet its policy is governing by complex factors both at home and abroad.

source: This article was prepared by the commonspace.eu research team using multiple media sources and agencies

photo: Security forces and local officials inspect a crater caused by a shell fired during the Karabakh war, which mistakenly hit agricultural land in Khoda-Afarin District, in Northern Iran. (Photo courtesy of Mehr news agency, Tehran)

 

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