Following his visit to Azerbaijan, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, answering questions from journalists, specifically touched on the issue of the Zangezur corridor and Iran's opposition to its opening.

" As for the Zangezur corridor, it is not a problem with Armenia. The Zangezur corridor is a problem with Iran. In other words, a problem of two Muslim countries. The fact that Iran has such a position on this issue upsets both Azerbaijan and us. In fact, it should upset them too. Furthermore, the fees charged per wagon are unfortunately very, very high here. I hope that we will overcome this problem soon. If they approached this positively, today Turkey-Azerbaijan-Iran would be integrated with each other both by road and rail, and perhaps a Beijing-London line would also be opened," the Turkish President said.

At this point, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan openly pointed to Iran as the main opponent of opening the corridor, without specifying Tehran's motives. In the meantime, these are well known - Iran is categorically against the "common Turkic belt", seeing in it a threat to its geopolitical plans. Tehran is trying to strengthen its geopolitical role, by "cutting" international transit routes. And there are interested Western "sponsors" in such strengthening of Iran, as Caucasus Plus has already written about in the article "France is creating a "great Iran", giving it transit routes and in the future the South Caucasus? (https://kavkazplus.com/news.php?id=39206).

Iran's desire to prevent the opening of the Zangezur corridor contradicts the interests of Russia itself. And here, at first glance, there is a contradiction.

In the current Ukrainian war, it is Iran that shows itself to be the most consistent ally of the aggressor, the Russian Federation, actually participating in the aggression against Ukraine by supplying weapons. Clarke-Smith, a member of the House of Commons (lower house) for the Conservative Party, made this point in particular during a recent hearing in the British Parliament:

 "The people of Ukraine know better than anyone what happens when the Iranian regime is left unchecked. Drones supplied by the IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) terrorise the whole of Ukraine and bring the Iranian threat into the heart of Europe, making Iran a direct accomplice to President Putin's horrific war crimes." 

That is, Iran is helping the Kremlin in every way in its aggression against Ukraine, but appears unwilling to help overcome the blockade that resulted from this aggression (which could be done by opening the Zangezur corridor). The question is why? After all, if Moscow agrees to Zangezur corridor, and most importantly, via this corridor wants to enter Iran's railway network as soon as possible (Resht-Astara branch will make this possible in 3 years only), Tehran should change its decision on this issue. Is the Turkophobia of the Iranian regime really that strong?

It appears that Tehran wants to use the corridor and overcoming the Russian blockade to the south as another "trump card". To ask the ally for one very important thing for him.

Iran's assistance to Russia in the Ukrainian war has become so critical that the regime in Tehran has become somewhat "manipulative" of the nuclear power, Russia. Yet, at the same time, the main goal of the authorities of the Republic of Iran is to become nuclear weapons possessors themselves.  Iran seems to be confidently reaching the finish line here.

Iran's two main de facto allies - France and Russia - are nuclear powers and have nuclear technology. However, France, which contributed to the Islamic Revolution in its time, and for many years tacitly helped Tehran to circumvent sanctions, is in no hurry to give Iran nuclear weapons. Understanding that a strengthened Iran would then escape from Paris's tacit influence.

Nor did Russia particularly want to help Iran with its nuclear programme until recently. Until it found itself in the current, almost catastrophic for itself, situation of war and international isolation.

Russia needs Iranian drones and other weapons for the war against Ukraine.  Russia needs Iranian consent for the Zangezur corridor. Russia needs the Resht-Astara railway giving access to the Indian Ocean. Russia needs a lot from Iran, which has lost all its allies. Though, until recently, the two countries were incomparable in their size and geopolitical weight, and Tehran was clearly "junior partner" of Moscow.

Now Moscow cannot do without Tehran neither in Syria nor in Ukraine. And Iran would like from the Russian Federation basically one thing - assistance in the development of nuclear weapons. The regime in Tehran has learned to "obtain" everything else without Russia.

The danger that, in desperation, the Kremlin might actually help Tehran's nuclear programme is well understood in the United States. All the more so because Washington is most likely aware of how Yerevan, a "common ally" of Iran and Russia, has helped Tehran with illicit nuclear material shipments.  Therefore, it is no coincidence that information has emerged that the US and Iran are returning to negotiations on a "nuclear deal" (although Washington has so far denied this). The U.S. is most likely seeking to "pre-empt" Iran's obtaining nuclear power status by offering "easing" of sanctions in exchange for a suspension of the nuclear program.

US President Joe Biden's administration has held indirect talks with Iran over a "mini agreement" on Iran's nuclear programme, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Israel's Knesset Committee on Foreign Relations and Security on 13 June. In principle, Israel has much to fear. Israel, of course, is careful not to say directly that the Russian Federation might help Iran with its nuclear programme, but it is likely to be aware that this is possible.

All the more so as some "hawks" in Moscow are already "giving signals" that Russia, defending its aggressive "interests" in Ukraine, may well be the first to use nuclear weapons.  A scandalous article about this was recently published by Sergey Karaganov, a pro-Kremlin political scientist and academic head of the Department of World Economy and World Politics at the Higher School of Economics. He explicitly called for Russia to use nuclear weapons against the West. In the opinion of Karaganov, which he expressed in the journal Profile (the article was also reprinted by the website Russia in Global Affairs), "the use of nuclear weapons could save humanity from a global catastrophe".

The question arises: if Karaganov voiced the "tough option" of nuclear blackmail by Russia (other Russian politicians, including Vladimir Putin, have also hinted indirectly at such blackmail before), why couldn't an ally be further armed with nuclear weapons on the eve of the "global nuclear war" the Kremlin is threatening the West with? Especially since the Kremlin has already decided to deploy tactical nuclear weapons against another "conditional ally", Belarus.

The situation around Iran has spun into a very complex tangle. And the issues of Tehran's nuclear programme have nothing to do with the issue of the Zangezur corridor only at first glance. In reality, against the background of Russia's defeats and weakening, Iran aspires to take over the baton of becoming "the main geopolitical counterweight" to the same United States. And if possible, to expand its influence in those countries which recently were the sphere of Russia's influence. However, firstly, without nuclear weapons such ambitions are unrealizable, and secondly, the "Turkic belt" itself can put a barrier to "great-power" aspirations of Tehran.

Alexandre Zakariadze