A weakened Iran benefits Turkey: Georgi Asatryan

Georgi Asatryan, Deputy Director of a center at the Institute of World Military Economy and Strategy at HSE University, commented to Alpha News on the situation in the Middle East, the talks between Tehran and Washington, the visit of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to Baku, and the negotiations between Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. leader Donald Trump.

“Both sides see themselves as victors, and each has grounds for that view. I consider last year’s twelve-day war and the current forty-day conflict as a single military campaign, with only a short pause between its phases. In essence, the current conflict is not over, and the likelihood of a renewed active phase remains high. At present, the sides are actively rearming and replenishing their arsenals. Israel is restocking with support from NATO countries, the EU, and the United States. In turn, the U.S. is increasing its military presence in the conflict zone and in the Persian Gulf region, including bases in Arab monarchies. Iran is also regrouping, recovering losses, producing ballistic missiles, drones, and pursuing other military developments. In other words, both sides are actively preparing for a new stage of hostilities. The negotiation process is largely formal and is not leading to a real resolution of the conflict. The sides remain very far from a compromise,” Asatryan said.

In the expert’s view, a ground operation against Iran is virtually out of the question.

“The United States is in a strategic deadlock. And when assessing the balance of forces, we should look not at overall capabilities, but at the theater of operations. There, Iran’s forces are significantly stronger than those of the U.S. grouping, Israel, and even their allies in the Arab states of the Persian Gulf. It is not even clear how Israel would act: in theory, ground forces are not being considered, this is not even in the plans. In fact, the United States has no real instruments to dismantle Iran’s political system, because a ground operation would be catastrophic,” he noted.

Speaking about Turkey’s restrained position in the Middle East conflict, the expert said it reflects the pragmatism of Turkish diplomacy.

“It seems to me this is due to the seriousness of the Turkish state and its political system. They understand that the destruction of the Islamic Republic as a political entity would not be in Turkey’s interest. Why? Because Iran is a regional competitor. A weakened Iran may be beneficial to Turkey, but a defeated, pro-Western, so to speak, ‘shah-era’, Iran would create very serious pressure on Turkey, which, despite its integration with the West, including NATO, still seeks to pursue an alternative great-power role in the region. If, instead of the Islamic Republic, which is largely isolated internationally, there were a ‘shah-style’ Iran with the same resources, lifted sanctions, massive oil exports, and U.S. military bases, that would place enormous pressure on Erdogan and modern Turkey. Therefore, a weakened Islamic Republic is one thing for Turkey, but a fully defeated, pro-Western Iran would be something entirely different,” Asatryan said.

Commenting on the visit of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to Baku, the expert added that such tours appear more like a public relations effort than genuine diplomacy or strategy.