War Reaches the Caspian: Central Asia Faces Growing Regional Risk
The United States and Israel's war with Iran began on February 28, 2026. The intensity of the conflict has fluctuated, but daily reports of missile strikes and explosions are increasingly resonating across Central Asia. Meanwhile, Russia’s latest war against Ukraine has continued for 1,466 days since it began on February 24, 2022. Late last year, Ukrainian drones reportedly struck a Russian oil platform at the Filanovsky field in the Caspian Sea, more than 700 kilometers from Ukraine’s nearest border. Ukraine also said the operation targeted the patrol ship Okhotnik, although the extent of the damage was not independently verified. The war in Ukraine has also created serious challenges for Kazakhstan’s oil exports via the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC). Repeated attacks and disruptions have threatened export flows, increased logistical risks, and added pressure on Kazakhstan’s budget revenues. The war against Iran has now brought military action to the Caspian coast of Iran, raising concern for energy producers and transit routes across the wider region. On March 5, Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that drones launched from Iranian territory struck the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic. According to the ministry, one drone hit the terminal building at Nakhchivan International Airport, while another crashed near a school in the village of Shekerabad. Azerbaijan demanded a thorough investigation. Iran later stated that it had promised to investigate the incident. Azerbaijan’s Prosecutor General’s Office subsequently opened a criminal case. As of now, tensions remain high, with both sides continuing to exchange accusations, and Azerbaijan maintaining heightened alert measures. More recently, the Israeli Defense Forces confirmed carrying out airstrikes in northern Iran, targeting naval vessels in the port city of Bandar-Anzali on the Caspian coast. The straight-line distance from Bandar-Anzali to Azerbaijan’s capital, Baku, is just over 300 kilometers, and approximately 420 kilometers to Turkmenbashi, a major international seaport and the center of Turkmenistan’s oil-refining industry. The resort zone of Avaza is also located there. By comparison, the distance from Israel to Bandar-Anzali exceeds 1,300 kilometers. These developments are contributing to rising economic uncertainty across Central Asia. The consequences extend beyond transportation and logistics disruptions, with broader implications for regional economies. The U.S. and Israel have not always appeared aligned on what would constitute victory, meaning the measure of success remains difficult to gauge. While the United States and Israel have repeatedly stated that significant damage has been inflicted on Iran’s military infrastructure (including destroying a substantial part of the Iranian navy), there is no publicly available, independently verified evidence confirming the extent of the damage to Iran’s leadership structure following the death of Ali Khamenei, Ali Larijani and other senior Iranian figures, or on Iran’s ability to mount an effective defence. Analysts have described Iran’s military resilience as decentralized, sometimes using the term "mosaic defense," meaning units can continue operating under standing orders even when senior leadership is hit. It is understood that, as part of this strategy, the Iranian military has spent decades refining its ability to operate as independent nodes, each equipped to conduct strikes under preexisting standing orders. This means that each unit is effectively equipped to strike autonomously, irrespective of what is taking place in Tehran. The resilience of this strategy was demonstrated again today, when the Mina al-Ahmadi refinery in Kuwait was struck. While the U.S. and Israel claim to have degraded Iran’s overall military capability, Iran has continued to strike energy infrastructure across the Gulf. Iran has also shown it can severely disrupt traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and strike Gulf energy infrastructure. Given that neither the U.S. nor Israel currently appears to be willing to compromise or state clearly what would constitute ‘victory’ - absent a collapse of the regime in Tehran - forecasts about the duration of the conflict vary widely and remain speculative at best. These range from expectations of a rapid conclusion of hostilities to predictions that the war could continue for months. For now, despite sustained attacks, many have argued that Iran’s governing system appears relatively stable, and expectations of swift political change have failed to materialize. However, there may be internal tensions within Iran’s leadership. This possibility was raised by Kazakhstan’s President, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, during a press conference held in connection with a constitutional referendum. Tokayev stated: “As for Iranian President Pezeshkian, he recently paid us an official visit and made a very favorable impression. He is a man of secular views. I welcomed his statement that Iran would not attack the Arab Gulf states. He even expressed apologies on behalf of Iran in this regard. But then his statements were disavowed, effectively nullified. Iran has attacked and continues to attack the Arab Gulf states. This suggests that the President of Iran does not wield full authority. That is a fact.”
For Central Asia, the significance of the conflict lies not in direct involvement but in proximity, exposure, and dependence. The Caspian Sea, long treated as a relatively insulated energy and transit space, is no longer peripheral to regional security calculations. What were once distant conflicts are now unfolding within operational reach of key infrastructure, shipping routes, and export corridors.
The combination of instability in the Middle East, continued disruption from the war in Ukraine, and uncertainty over Iran’s internal cohesion is creating a layered risk environment for the region. Energy flows, investor confidence, and transport reliability are all increasingly vulnerable to developments beyond Central Asia’s control.
For governments in the region, the challenge will be to preserve stability while navigating an external environment that is becoming more volatile, less predictable, and harder to hedge against.
The History of Nauryz: An Ancient Festival That Continues to Unite Central Asia
Ahead of the Nauryz holiday, The Times of Central Asia looks at the origins and enduring significance of one of the region’s oldest celebrations. More than a seasonal festival, Nauryz reflects a deep connection between people, nature, and cultural identity, a tradition that has evolved over thousands of years and remains central to life across Central Asia. Origins and Meaning
Nauryz, also known as Nowruz, is one of the world’s oldest holidays, marking the arrival of spring and the beginning of a new year. It is celebrated on the day of the spring equinox, when day and night are approximately equal and nature appears to begin a new cycle.
For many communities, the holiday symbolizes renewal, hope for prosperity, and the start of a new stage in life.
The name “Nowruz” derives from ancient Iranian words meaning “new day.” This concept lies at the heart of the celebration: the renewal of life and the symbolic rebirth of nature after winter.
With a history spanning more than 3,000 years, the holiday spread across Eurasia along the Silk Roads and became embedded in the cultural traditions of Central Asia, the Middle East, and the Caucasus. [caption id="attachment_45687" align="alignnone" width="300"]
@depositphotos[/caption]
Today, Nowruz is recognized not only as a calendar event but also as a cultural tradition that promotes values such as peace, mutual respect, and harmony with nature.
Connection to the Spring Equinox
Nauryz is traditionally celebrated during the spring equinox, which usually falls on March 20 or 21, when the Sun crosses the celestial equator and daylight and nighttime hours are nearly equal.
Since ancient times, this moment has symbolized the awakening of nature and the beginning of a new agricultural year.
Historical sources indicate that different communities once observed various dates in March, often guided by natural signs. Over time, however, the astronomical equinox, commonly observed on March 21, became the most widely accepted date.
Medieval scholars paid close attention to this phenomenon. In the 11th and 12th centuries, astronomers such as Omar Khayyam refined calendar calculations to align the start of the year more precisely with the equinox.
Alongside scientific knowledge, traditional methods were also used to forecast harvests and weather conditions, including observing seed germination or measuring the length of shadows before the holiday.
Today, Nauryz is officially celebrated on March 21 in countries such as Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, while UNESCO also recognizes Nowruz as marking the first day of spring.
Rituals and Traditions
For centuries, Nauryz has been marked by rituals symbolizing renewal, fertility, and prosperity. Among both nomadic and settled communities, it has traditionally been celebrated with public festivities, games, and family gatherings.
Common customs include ritual cleansing with water, exchanging gifts, and offering food to neighbors and guests. The altybakan swing is widely regarded as a symbol of spring and joy. In some regions, the ancient practice of jumping over fire has been preserved as a purification ritual.
Food plays a central role in the celebration. Although culinary traditions vary by country, they share a common symbolism of abundance and new life.
In Kazakhstan, the main festive dish is Nauryz kozhe, a soup prepared from seven ingredients representing prosperity and well-being. In Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, sumalak, a sweet dish made from sprouted wheat, is a key symbol of the holiday.
Sumalak is traditionally prepared collectively, often overnight, with participants taking turns stirring the pot and making wishes. It is believed to bring prosperity and fertility.
Festive tables also feature dishes such as plov, herb-filled samsa, and manty dumplings.
Celebrations are typically accompanied by traditional games and competitions, including horse racing, wrestling, equestrian contests, and street performances. People gather around a shared dastarkhan, sing songs, visit relatives, and exchange wishes for health, peace, and prosperity.
[caption id="attachment_45688" align="alignnone" width="300"]
@depositphotos[/caption]
From Suppression to Revival
During the Soviet period, large-scale public celebrations of Nauryz were restricted, and many traditions were preserved mainly within families and local communities. From the late 1980s onward, however, the holiday began to experience a revival.
Following the independence of Central Asian states, Nauryz was officially recognized as a public holiday across the region.
Today, it is widely celebrated in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan, with festivals, fairs, and public events held in major cities.
Its international recognition underscores its cultural significance. In 2009, Nowruz was inscribed on UNESCO’s Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity, and since 2010 March 21 has been observed as the International Day of Nowruz.
Nauryz remains one of the most enduring cultural traditions in Central Asia, with its meaning preserved across generations.
Its emphasis on renewal and hospitality continues to bring communities together across borders and remains a familiar part of life across the region.
Xi Jinping and Berdymuhamedov Sr. Discuss Expansion of China-Turkmenistan Partnership
Chinese President Xi Jinping held talks with Gurbanguly Berdymuhamedov, Turkmenistan's former president and leader of its People's Council, during the latter’s official visit to China. The meeting took place on March 18 at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing, according to a statement from China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Xi noted that China had recently completed its annual parliamentary meetings, commonly referred to as the “Two Sessions,” during which key socio-economic priorities were outlined. He said the country’s new development agenda would support modernization efforts and create additional opportunities for international cooperation.
The Chinese president said that mutual political support remains central to the comprehensive strategic partnership between Beijing and Ashgabat. He reaffirmed China’s readiness to continue backing Turkmenistan on issues related to sovereignty, territorial integrity, and its internationally recognized policy of permanent neutrality.
Xi and Berdymuhamedov discussed expanding cooperation in the energy sector, particularly natural gas supplies, as well as in trade, investment, transport connectivity, agriculture, artificial intelligence, the digital economy, and clean energy. Both leaders also highlighted the importance of aligning China’s Belt and Road Initiative with Turkmenistan’s plans to revitalize historic Silk Road trade routes.
Humanitarian cooperation was another focus of the talks, including plans to develop educational and cultural exchanges and establish joint centers. The leaders also discussed coordination on regional security challenges, including efforts to counter terrorism, separatism, and extremism.
Berdymuhamedov reaffirmed Turkmenistan’s commitment to the One China principle and expressed readiness to deepen bilateral cooperation in energy, infrastructure, and trade. He said closer ties with China were important for Turkmenistan’s long-term economic development and again noted Beijing’s support for the country’s neutrality policy.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi also attended the meeting.As previously reported by The Times of Central Asia, the visit followed Berdymuhamedov’s trip to the United States in mid-February, the details of which were not fully disclosed.
Shortly after his return, Turkmenistan’s President, Gurbanguly's son Serdar Berdymuhamedov, dismissed the country’s ambassador to the U.S. and its permanent representative to the United Nations. No official explanation was provided for the personnel changes.
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan Send Humanitarian Aid to Iran
Tajikistan is sending a convoy of 110 trucks carrying humanitarian aid to Iran, which has been targeted by heavy U.S. and Israeli air strikes in a war that started on February 28. The dispatch of aid follows similar deliveries by Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan. Central Asian countries are aiming for neutrality in the Mideast war, maintaining ties with the Iranian government even as they profess support for Gulf Arab states that have been targeted by Iranian drones and missiles. Iran’s relationships with countries to the east range from the close cultural affinity that it enjoys with Tajikistan to sometimes tense interactions with Azerbaijan, which has a military partnership with Israel. The trucks from Tajikistan left for Iran on Wednesday and “will soon arrive in the friendly and brotherly country,” Tajikistan’s government said, without providing details about how the aid will be distributed. The convoy would likely travel through Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan to reach the northeastern Iranian border. The aid “comprises 3,610 tons of cargo, including 45 tons of medicines, a large volume of sanitary and hygienic products, children's clothing, various food products, household items, bedding, tents, building materials, and other necessary supplies,” Tajikistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said. Tajik President Emomali Rahmon posted a photo on social media that showed a long line of aid trucks on a highway. Turkmenistan, which shares a border with Iran, has said it sent humanitarian aid, mainly for distribution to children. It appeared to allude to the war, saying that “supporting and assisting close neighbors in difficult times is a noble tradition of the Turkmen people, rooted in ancient times.” Uzbekistan has sent trucks carrying flour, rice, sugar, pasta, sunflower oil, canned goods and medical supplies to Iran. Azerbaijan, which borders northwest Iran, has also dispatched truckloads of humanitarian aid to Iran, according to Ali Alizada, Azerbaijan’s ambassador to Iran. Azerbaijan previously said it was evacuating staff from its embassy in Tehran as well as its consulate in the Iranian city of Tabriz, after accusing Iran of drone attacks on its territory.
Pannier and Hillard’s Spotlight on Central Asia: New Episode Coming Sunday
As Managing Editor of The Times of Central Asia, I’m delighted that, in partnership with the Oxus Society for Central Asian Affairs, from October 19, we are the home of the Spotlight on Central Asia podcast. Chaired by seasoned broadcasters Bruce Pannier of RFE/RL’s long-running Majlis podcast and Michael Hillard of The Red Line, each fortnightly instalment will take you on a deep dive into the latest news, developments, security issues, and social trends across an increasingly pivotal region. This week, the team will examine accelerated plans to relocate people from the area around Tajikistan's Rogun hydropower plant, with guests from the Coalition for Human Rights in Development, including Eugene Simonov.
Informal OTS Foreign Ministers’ Meeting Tests Limits of Turkic Coordination
Escalating tensions linked to the widening conflict in the Middle East have tested the political cohesion of the Organization of Turkic States (OTS), according to Kazakh political commentator Dzhanibek Suleyev. Recent incidents affecting both Azerbaijan and Turkey — including drone strikes in Azerbaijan’s Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic and a missile intercepted by Turkish air defenses — have raised security concerns across the wider region. Suleyev argues that developments of this scale might normally prompt an urgent summit of heads of state. Instead, Turkey convened an informal meeting of foreign ministers and senior diplomatic representatives from OTS member states. The gathering took place on March 7, when officials convened at the invitation of Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan. According to Turkish media, ministers later met with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan during their visit. Speaking to The Times of Central Asia, Suleyev drew attention to how the meeting was covered in the media of Central Asian member states. “In the Uzbek press, coverage was limited, and even on the website of their Ministry of Foreign Affairs, there is not a single word about the informal summit of OTS foreign ministers. Kazakhstan, moreover, was represented not by Foreign Minister Yermek Kosherbayev but by his deputy Alibek Bakayev. Kyrgyzstan’s Foreign Ministry issued four notes about the trip of its minister Jeenbek Kulubaev to Istanbul, three of which were devoted to the summit, but without any particular details,” Suleyev said. Kazakhstan’s Foreign Ministry published a short summary of the meeting, noting in broad terms that representatives discussed cooperation among Turkic states and regional developments. According to Suleyev, the joint statement adopted after the meeting was difficult to find outside of Azerbaijani media. One of the few outlets to publish the text in full was Azerbaijan’s APA news agency. Much of the statement focused on the incidents affecting Azerbaijan and Turkey, stressing that “any threat to the security of OTS member states causes concern for the entire Organization… The ministers strongly condemned the attacks carried out from the territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran against the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of the Republic of Azerbaijan, including strikes against civilian facilities and the territory of the Republic of Turkey,” the statement continued. “The rest of the statement boils down to destabilization in the Middle East could lead to a global economic crisis, the Palestinian conflict must be resolved taking into account UN resolutions, and so on,” Suleyev told TCA. One notable event during the meeting was the foreign ministers’ reception by President Erdoğan. Official summaries released by participating governments described the discussion in diplomatic terms. “Kazakh sources wrote that ‘prospects for the development of cooperation within the framework of Turkic cooperation were discussed,’” Suleyev said. Kyrgyz statements used similar language, stating that the “President of Turkey… noted the importance of regular dialogue on current regional and international issues and expressed interest in further developing multilateral cooperation within the framework of the Organization.” “In short, these are streamlined diplomatic formulations without specific details,” Suleyev said. According to a press release from the Kyrgyz Foreign Ministry, the discussions also addressed issues beyond the Middle East. Ministers exchanged views on tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan, as well as concerns related to potential sanctions affecting Kyrgyzstan. “The discussion of sanctions noted that unilateral restrictive measures negatively affect global trade and the stability of economic ties. The position of the Kyrgyz Republic on the need to observe the principles of international law and the inadmissibility of unilateral measures outside the framework of the United Nations Security Council was emphasized,” the ministry stated. For Suleyev, the restrained tone of official statements and limited coverage in the region’s media point to deeper structural limits within the organization. “These nuances and the minimal coverage in the press of the interested states indicate the inability of Ankara and Baku to ensure significant progress in integration even within the OTS itself,” he said. Suleyev also pointed to the organization’s broader ambitions to expand cooperation with outside partners through formats sometimes described as OTS+. According to Suleyev, these initiatives appear aimed primarily at Hungary, an EU member state that has previously shown interest in cooperation with the organization. “That interest is connected with the search for an alternative to Russian hydrocarbons,” Suleyev said. Originally founded in 2009 as the Turkic Council, the OTS brings together Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey, and Uzbekistan, with observer states including Hungary and Turkmenistan. In recent years, the organization has expanded its agenda beyond cultural cooperation toward economic and transport connectivity across the Turkic world.
Central Asia Faces an Arc of Instability to the South
Until a few weeks ago, looking south from Central Asia, observers of the region saw nothing but opportunities for connectivity. Admittedly, Iran on one side and the area between Afghanistan and Pakistan on the other have never been known for their stability. However, the current situation sees two serious conflicts on the southern border of Central Asia, which risk representing an arc of instability that will be difficult to overcome. While the global energy implications of the ongoing war in the Middle East, which began following the joint attack by the United States and Israel on Iran, are likely to be felt for months to come, the greatest risk for the Central Asian region is related to connectivity. This could also compromise significant efforts made in this regard by regional governments. Consider, for example, the recent trip to Pakistan by Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, which focused on the possibility of building a railway from Pakistani ports to Kazakh territory via Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. For much of the past decade, Central Asian governments have invested heavily in opening southern trade routes to global markets. Railways through Afghanistan, port access through Iran, and new logistics corridors to Pakistan were meant to reduce dependence on northern routes and expand the region’s economic options. The sudden emergence of conflicts along the southern frontier now raises questions about how secure those connections will be. The Times of Central Asia spoke with Peter Frankopan, author and Professor of Global History at Oxford University, about the potential implications of the two wars on Central Asia’s southern border. According to him, the main risk is not related to connectivity, but to contagion: “The key issue is about the safety of civilians and the protection of infrastructure in Central Asia,” he told TCA. “In times like these, nothing can be ruled out. With Iran lashing out at neighbors and realizing that attacks on oil, gas and more give it leverage, it is not hard to see what might come next. Second, of course, are threats to national economies. Wars create winners and losers. One can see a boom for some people in Central Asian states, but plenty of pressures, especially on inflation.” Indeed, the economic repercussions of the Middle East conflict are already being felt in the region, particularly in Turkmenistan, which maintains some of the closest trade ties with Iran and shares a long border with the country. Frankopan does not see any particular differences in terms of the danger to Central Asia posed by what is happening in Iran and between Pakistan and Afghanistan: “Clearly, instability in Afghanistan is an immediate concern, but it is not related to Iran and will have its own velocity and rhythms. But the risks of expanding violence and terrorism, of refugees, of narcotics and other illicit trafficking are real - and may well get worse.” Regarding connectivity, one of the topics that Central Asian governments pay the most attention to, according to Frankopan, the current situation should not be considered an insurmountable obstacle: “This is simply testimony to turbulence as competing ideas of the present and future jostle and take shape. A few weeks ago, everyone was talking about middle corridors and a new golden era of exchange; now they are talking about breakdowns and dislocation. Both of those cannot be right - or wrong. People, states, and businesses cooperate when they want or need to, and when it suits all sides. Like all relationships, it works as long as it works, but it can all suddenly stop. The question now is who wants to collaborate and work together, why, and about what.” Another aspect that could potentially jeopardize the difficult balancing act of the Central Asian republics, particularly Kazakhstan, should not be overlooked: increasingly narrow political margins. Consider, on the one hand, the fact that Uzbekistan has recently collaborated with India and Iran on a project such as the International North–South Transport Corridor, which has - or perhaps it would be more accurate to say “had” - a very important hub in the port of Chabahar, a collaboration that the current close relationship between the U.S. administration led by Donald Trump could make very costly to maintain. On the other hand, the increasingly close relations between Kazakhstan and Israel could prove difficult to maintain in light of the increasingly assertive regional policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Regarding this dimension, and with particular reference to Kazakhstan, Frankopan adopts a longer-term perspective, stepping back from the constant flow of news coming from the frontline. “Tokayev is a shrewd operator, and one who evaluates risk carefully. I don’t know how he is assessing the current situation, but I would pay close attention to it and think his analysis would be worth listening to. Kazakhstan has to balance multiple competing interests and pressures. Some of us think that experience helps in these circumstances; if you take a historian’s view, those run deep. So, balance and risk management are everything.” In recent years, Central Asia has demonstrated great resilience and the ability to adapt quickly to an ever-changing international landscape. Although the situation on its southern border is becoming increasingly alarming, it remains possible that the pragmatism of regional leaders in international relations will once again prevail.
How an Incident on the Azerbaijan-Iran Border Became a Test for Diplomacy in the Region
The drone strike on Azerbaijan's Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic on March 5 has become one of the most serious incidents in relations between Baku and Tehran in recent years. Azerbaijani authorities described the incident as a terrorist act and demanded explanations and an apology from Iran. Tehran, in turn, rejected the accusations, suggesting the possibility of a provocation by “third forces.” Following the drone incident, Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev held a phone call with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev to discuss regional security. According to the Azerbaijani presidency, Aliyev thanked Tokayev for condemning the attack on Nakhchivan and for voicing support for Azerbaijan. What began as a local security incident has raised concerns about regional stability in the South Caucasus. Terrorist Act Against the State Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev issued a statement strongly condemning "this despicable terrorist act. Those who committed it must be brought to justice immediately,” Aliyev said. According to Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, one drone hit the terminal building of Nakhchivan International Airport, while another crashed near a school in the village of Shekerabad. Two civilians were reportedly injured. Baku stressed that the attack, allegedly launched from Iranian territory, violated international law and could lead to a dangerous escalation of tensions in the region. Diplomatic Escalation Despite the harsh rhetoric in the first hours after the incident, Baku opted to rely primarily on diplomatic tools. The Iranian ambassador was summoned to the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry and handed a formal note of protest requesting official explanations. Azerbaijan said on Friday that it was evacuating staff from its embassy in Tehran as well as its consulate in the city of Tabriz. At the same time, Azerbaijani security forces were placed on high alert. According to Aliyev, the country’s armed forces were instructed to prepare possible countermeasures. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke by phone with Aliyev, condemning the attack and expressing support for Azerbaijan, according to official statements. Reports of alleged Iranian-linked sabotage plots also surfaced, with the Azerbaijani authorities stating that several terrorist attacks had been prevented on the country’s territory. According to the State Security Service, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was behind the plots. Among the alleged targets was the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, a strategic energy corridor linking the Caspian region with Turkey and one of the main routes for exporting Azerbaijani oil. According to Azerbaijani sources, other potential targets included the Israeli embassy, a synagogue in the capital, and a leader of the local Mountain Jewish community. The security service reported that three explosive devices had been brought into the country but were discovered and defused before they could be delivered. The development of the crisis has prompted increased diplomatic contact between world leaders. Russian President Vladimir Putin held a telephone conversation with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian amid the growing regional tensions. Shortly thereafter, Russia’s Foreign Ministry called on both sides to exercise restraint and emphasized the need for a thorough investigation into the drone strike. On March 7, the foreign ministers of all the Central Asian states, together with Azerbaijan, were guests of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Istanbul to discuss regional cooperation and emerging security challenges within the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) framework. On March 8, French President Emmanuel Macron also held a telephone conversation with Aliyev and expressed support for Azerbaijan. Aliyev also held consultations with several leaders from Central Asia and the Middle East as the crisis unfolded. The office of Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev reported a phone call with Aliyev to discuss regional security, while regional media reported consultations and expressions of concern from officials in Kazakhstan. Aliyev later also thanked Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev for his support following the incident. Analysts note that such intense diplomatic activity reflects attempts by international actors to prevent further escalation in the region. Tehran’s Response: Denial and Accusations of Provocation Following the strike, Iran categorically rejected accusations of its involvement. The general staff of the country’s armed forces stated that Iran “respects the sovereignty of all states, especially neighboring and Muslim ones.” Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian appealed to neighboring countries, emphasizing that Tehran is seeking to resolve the conflict through diplomatic means. “We respect your sovereignty and believe that the security and stability of the region should be achieved through the collective efforts of the countries in the region,” he wrote on X. By March 8, there were already signs of de-escalation. Pezeshkian contacted Aliyev directly, stating that the incident involving the attacks was not related to Iran and assuring his counterpart that the circumstances would be investigated. He also expressed gratitude for Azerbaijan’s intention to provide humanitarian aid to Iran. How Analysts Are Interpreting the Incident The incident has sparked intense debate among regional analysts, who have proposed several possible explanations. Some regional analysts have suggested that the strike could have been intended to put pressure on Azerbaijan amid broader regional tensions. In recent years, Azerbaijan has strengthened relations with the U.S. and Israel, developments that have caused concern in Tehran. In this context, analysts have discussed the possibility of threats against the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, which supplies a significant share of Israel’s imported oil. Around 30–45% of Israel’s oil imports originate from Azerbaijan via BTC and related supply chains, with some reports suggesting the share reached 46% earlier this year. A shutdown of the pipeline would affect Israel’s energy security, but it would also have serious economic consequences for Azerbaijan, as up to 80% of the country’s oil exports pass through this route. Disruptions would also affect Turkey, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and European consumers. The second explanation focuses on the internal structure of Iran’s military system. Some analysts have also raised the possibility that the decision could have originated from elements within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps rather than Iran’s political leadership. Given the complexity of command structures during military operations, analysts note that technical failures or errors in the command system also cannot be ruled out. A third explanation, promoted by Iranian officials through state media, involves the possible role of third parties seeking to draw the region into a wider conflict. Representatives of Iran’s Khatam al-Anbia Central Headquarters issued a warning to Azerbaijan, calling on the country to remove the Israeli presence from its territory. A Fragile Security Environment Even if this incident proves to be an isolated episode, it highlights the fragility of security in the South Caucasus. Azerbaijan plays a central role in the energy architecture of Eurasia, with major oil and gas routes from the Caspian region to Western markets passing through its territory. Any escalation between Baku and Tehran could therefore affect not only regional security but also the stability of energy flows and transport corridors linking Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Europe. For now, despite strong rhetoric, both sides appear willing to keep the dispute within the diplomatic arena. The key question is whether the incident will remain a short-term crisis or become the first episode in a broader confrontation in one of Eurasia’s most strategically sensitive regions.
Sunkar Podcast
Central Asia and the Troubled Southern Route
