Blue In Green
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 2,359
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Here it's not so much a question of reactivity vs proactivity as it is one of rationality vs irrationality.
Initiating inter-state conflict against a neighbor including the Baku regime, makes no sense for Iran. Iran should try to coopt actors such as these where possible, by exploiting every potential for cooperation on dossiers of mutual benefit, while at the same time building her defenses and countering unconventional provocation through unconventional instruments of power.
This is very much a proactive policy. Sitting idle and then suddenly deciding to march troops across the Aras would be crudely reactive-impulsive on the other hand.
Well, this development actually means Turkey backed down, not the other way around. Erdogan clearly declared that if Armenia obstructs the Zangezur corridor in breach of the 2020 ceasefire agreement, then Ankara will consider using the Iranian route as an alternative - not military occupation of Armenian lands.
In other terms, they seem to be conforming to Iran's red line and to accept handing Iran full control over their connection to Nakhjavan.
Iran just called the small fish's bluff on Zangezur. This is what happened.
Agreed.
Do you think Turkey had to reign in Aliyev on this matter or did Azerbaijan act more independently in their decision to seemingly yield to Iranian concerns?