SAEDNEWS: The primary goal of the US presence in the Caucasus is to isolate Russia and provoke countries in the region, including Azerbaijan and Armenia, to stand against Russia, Mohsen Pakaein says.
In the evolving geopolitical landscape of the South Caucasus, Iran continues to emphasize its commitment to regional peace, stability, and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all neighboring states. Recognizing the strategic importance of the area and its own extensive border with the South Caucasus, Iran advocates for diplomatic dialogue and cooperative security architectures that prevent foreign interference and uphold regional interests.
To shed more light on Iran's stance regarding the recent developments in the Caucasus region, we reached out to Mohsen Pakaeen, an Iranian political expert and former diplomat.
The full text of the interview is as follows,
1. Overall, how do you assess the current political-security situation in the South Caucasus, and what position do you see for Iran in these developments?
The South Caucasus, following the liberation of Karabakh and its return to the Republic of Azerbaijan, is on the path to a new security architecture characterized by the dominance of a "peace discourse" in the region. In fact, after the quadrilateral meeting held within the framework of the Meeting of the European Political Community in Prague in October 2022, and after the meeting of Ilham Aliyev, President of Azerbaijan; Emmanuel Macron, President of France; Nikol Pashinyan, Prime Minister of Armenia; and Charles Michel, the then President of the European Council, a statement was released which said that Armenia and Azerbaijan are committed to the United Nations Charter, recognize each other’s territorial integrity and national sovereignty, and reaffirm their commitment to the 1991 Almaty Declaration.
In the Almaty Declaration, signed on December 21, 1991, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the signatory countries, including Azerbaijan and Armenia, committed to recognizing and respecting each other's territorial integrity and the inviolability of existing international borders. Accordingly, Karabakh returned to the Republic of Azerbaijan, and this republic accepted Armenia's sovereignty over the route known as Zangazur. Thus, Azerbaijan's territorial claims over Zangazur, which implied the possible occupation of this corridor and severance of Iran's border with Armenia, were negated.
At the current stage, negotiations between the two countries for finalizing a peace agreement have progressed, and importantly, both parties have decided to negotiate directly without any mediation.
2. What do you think are the implications of the Zangezur Corridor for various actors?
There is no doubt that America's intention is to weaken and isolate Iran in the region. However, Iran shares over 400 kilometers of border along the Aras River with the South Caucasus, meaning Iran has the longest border in the South Caucasus. No country dominates this corridor as much as Iran does, and no foreign country can take any specific initiative against Iran in this area. If Western countries enter this region, they will put themselves at grave risk and face serious vulnerabilities.
The US will not engage in military conflict with any country in the South Caucasus, just as it did not engage directly with Russia in Ukraine, but rather used Ukraine as bait to confront Russia. The primary goal of the US presence in the Caucasus is to isolate Russia and provoke countries in the region, including Azerbaijan and Armenia, to stand against Russia, especially at this stage, as relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan with Russia have cooled. Therefore, Russia would [probably] react strongly and will not easily lose the Caucasus. Of course, if Russia does not take action, Iran alone can prevent the advancement of US objectives.
3. Regarding the visit of the Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister to Tehran, what achievements can be anticipated from this visit?
It is natural that at this stage we should consult with Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russia. In our consultations with the Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister, while welcoming the establishment of peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan and announcing Iran’s agreement to remove blockages in communication networks, we emphasized that this corridor should not lead to a geopolitical change in the region or sever Iran’s access to other communication routes. We also stressed that the presence of the US in this region is not conducive to the security of the Caucasus.
The Armenian side also promised that Yerevan will pay essential attention to peace, regional stability, and the mutual interests and benefits of Iran and Armenia when making decisions regarding communication routes. We hope that Armenia will act wisely regarding the non-intervention of any military or security forces in implementing the Zangazur project and will be vigilant against possible American actions that, under the cover of economic investment and claims of ensuring peace, pursue hegemonic goals in the Caucasus region.
4. If Azerbaijan insists on advancing the Zangazur project, what diplomatic measures or alternative actions can Iran consider?
First and foremost, we engage in diplomatic consultations with regional countries, including Azerbaijan, Russia, Armenia, and even Turkey, reminding them of the dangers of the US presence in this area. We also strive to ensure that Armenia avoids any action that would disrupt the current peace discourse in the Caucasus.
