On March 5, 2026, Iran organized drone attacks on Nakhchivan, and Azerbaijan, describing the action as “a terrorist attack,” called on Iran to take responsibility. Tehran, however, stated that the attack was “a provocation by Israel.”[1] Iran made similar statements regarding the missiles shot down within Turkish territory, pointing to Israel’s provocation. Although it was noted that the point of origin for these attacks was Iranian territory, Tehran’s attempt to shift blame onto Israel while avoiding responsibility has raised a number of suspicions.
The first issue that needs to be addressed here is Tehran’s refusal to take responsibility for these attacks originating from Iran and its accusatory stance toward Israel. This situation raises the question of whether Iran maintains full control over its own territory and military assets, even during wartime. In other words, if these attacks are considered to be a provocation by Israel, as Iran claims, it would also be possible to speak of a strong Israeli presence within Iran. The assassination of many high-ranking Iranian political leaders and military officials by Israel over the past year is also considered an indication of this. Regardless of how the attacks targeting Nakhchivan and Turkey were carried out, Iran’s refusal to take responsibility and its accusations against Israel can be seen as a move aimed at disrupting regional balances and altering the geopolitical landscape.
The territory of the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, which is part of Azerbaijan, has been a key component of the regional cooperation, and occasionally competition, process involving neighboring countries such as Turkey, Iran, Armenia, Georgia, and Russia over the past two decades. The main aspects of this competition include energy, trade, transportation projects, and security. The focal point where this competition has intensified and become critical is the Zangezur Corridor, which is planned to connect Nakhchivan to Azerbaijan. The biggest obstacle to this connection was the fact that the Karabakh territories remained under Armenian occupation until 2020. The liberation of these territories during the 44-day Patriotic War in 2020 rapidly shifted the balance of power and geopolitics in the South Caucasus, marking a major step toward regional peace, stability, and prosperity. The Karabakh Victory has also been a positive development for the construction of the Zangezur Corridor. In this new geopolitical environment, Azerbaijan’s reliance on Iran as a route to reach Nakhchivan has decreased. Consequently, Iran has positioned itself as one of the actors losing influence in this new geopolitical landscape.
The second major development that has shifted the balance of power in the South Caucasus; the United States’ (U.S.) involvement in regional developments, specifically its role as mediator in the signing of the Azerbaijan-Armenia Peace Agreement and its resolution of the route known as the “Zangezur Corridor” under the name “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP).” Thus, a critical threshold has been crossed towards removing the “Armenian obstacle” and the necessary “Iranian connection” that prevented the connection of Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan. This new geopolitical landscape, shaped in part by U.S. intervention, has created an equation in which Iran has lost a significant part of its power. From this perspective, the TRIPP project has drawn attention as a move by the U.S. aimed at completely isolating Iran in the region and encircling it.
Nevertheless, thanks to the 3+3 mechanism initiated by Turkey, an environment of regional cooperation and solidarity, including Armenia, Iran, and Russia, continues to be sustained. In this context, particularly thanks to Turkey’s efforts, the tension between Azerbaijan and Iran, which could have potentially escalated following the attacks in Nakhchivan, was resolved before it even began, and these efforts have once again highlighted Turkey’s commitment and dedication to regional friendship, solidarity, security, and stability.
Consequently, the war in Iran can also be viewed as a direct extension of the transport corridors in the South Caucasus, major power rivalry, and regional geo-economic transformation. In other words, the competition taking shape around the South Caucasus and the Zangezur Corridor has deepened Iran’s sense of strategic isolation and encirclement, serving as one of the factors that laid the geopolitical grounds for the war. In contrast, mechanisms such as the 3+3 Regional Cooperation Platform and Turkey’s balancing initiatives aim to keep the tension under control and appease it on a regional scale. Turkey’s multilateral diplomacy stands out as a crucial balancing factor in preventing the escalation of tensions, particularly along the Azerbaijan-Iran axis and, more broadly, in the Middle East into a direct conflict.
Following the attack on Nakhchivan, Iran’s approach to the South Caucasus and regional cooperation has been increasingly questioned. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s initial strong statement regarding the attack was a clear expression of the lack of trust toward Iran.[2] Indeed, the fragmented nature of Iran’s decision-making mechanisms (such as policy differences between the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the government) serves as a source of uncertainty and suspicion not only among neighboring countries but also for all countries around the world affected by this policy. In this context, even if the attacks were carried out directly by the Iranian regime, its denial of involvement could be part of a strategy to maintain a sustainable/controlled level of tension or crisis in the region. When considered together with Iran’s competitive stance toward regional developments over the past fifteen years, this approach can be viewed as a reasonable possibility.
In this context, the attack in Nakhchivan is not simply a military action but also indicative of Iran’s crisis management and regional strategy. By adopting a strategy of denying responsibility for the attack, Iran may be aiming to project deterrence on the ground while simultaneously limiting the diplomatic and military costs that direct conflict could generate. This approach becomes more meaningful when evaluated along with Iran’s competitive and multi-layered foreign policy approach toward regional developments over the past fifteen years. Iran is pursuing a strategy of maintaining its influence in the Middle East through agents, limited military moves, and various narratives. The situation that emerged following the Nakhchivan attack can be interpreted as the latest manifestation of these strategic moves in the South Caucasus.
[1] “Azerbaycan lideri Aliyev: İran’ın Nahçıvan’a saldırısı ‘terör eylemi’”, BBC, https://www.bbc.com/turkce/articles/cn711nplyk4o, (Date Accessed: 26.03.2026).
[2] “Azerbaycan Cumhurbaşkanı Aliyev’den İran’a sert tepki: Bize karşı bu terör eylemini gerçekleştirenler pişman olacaklar”, Hürriyet, https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/dunya/azerbaycan-cumhurbaskani-aliyevden-irana-sert-tepki-bize-karsi-bu-teror-eylemini-gerceklestirenler-pisman-olacaklar-43122188, (Date Accessed: 26.03.2026).
