STRATEGIC GOALS OF OPERATION ROARING LION AND EPIC FURY The war in Iran has extended its geographical scope since the launch of the Israeli and American operations Roaring Lion and Epic Fury to dismantle and degrade Iran’s offensive military strategic capabilities, including its nuclear program, and end Tehran’s support for proxies in the Middle East. Another strategic goal of the operations is to strike the Iranian military industry, which enables the Tehran regime to project power in the neighbourhood. The joint operations also have a secondary dimension, mostly political in nature, to target Iran’s governmental apparatus, particularly the coercive means of the Islamic Republic, meaning the IRGC, Basij paramilitary and police, in order to destabilise the regime in the hope of creating a fertile political environment for regime change. If achieved, the strategic aim of preventing Tehran from exerting influence outside its borders, including cutting off Iran’s backing for proxy groups, will reduce Iran’s standing and shape geopolitics in its neighbouring countries for decades to come.

As part of its retaliatory measures the Iranian regime is engaging in missile and drone strikes on its neighbours, particularly the Gulf Arab states. It is targeting mostly civilian infrastructure such as airports, hotels, city centres, oil installations, and water resources, as well as the U.S. military facilities in the Gulf region, embassies etc. Ballistic missiles strikes, which were intercepted by NATO over Turkey, were aimed at the Incirlik airbase, jointly used by the Turkish and U.S. militaries. These retaliatory measures are viewed as part of Iran’s rationale of targeting the countries where the U.S. military operates or is stationed. However, drone strikes on 5 March on Azerbaijan’s Nakhchivan exclave, situated on Iran’s northwestern borders, are a singular instance of a target that contains neither U.S. nor other foreign military bases, contrary to the Iranian official narrative. What motivated the Iranian regime to target a civilian airport and a school located in the Azerbaijani exclave region?

AZERBAIJANI REACTION TO IRANIAN STRIKES Iran used four Arash 2 drones in its 5 March strike on Nakhchivan International Airport, one of which fell close to a school in a nearby village. The airport is the sole direct communication link between the Nakhchivan exclave and the rest of Azerbaijan. In a statement outlining defensive actions to protect the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, the Azerbaijani Ministry of Defence reported that the drones were fired by the Islamic Republic of Iran from within Iranian territory. Despite Azerbaijan’s official position of neutrality in the Iran conflict and repeated remarks that its airspace will not be used against the Islamic Republic, the drone strikes on Nakhchivan civilian infrastructure, and particularly the school, revealed once again that Azerbaijan’s southern neighbour poses an existential threat. The drone strikes in Nakhchivan also contradicted the Iranian regime’s assertions that it only targets nations from which its territory is supposedly facing U.S. attacks or that have U.S. military bases, as there are no foreign military bases in Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev branded the drone attacks by Iran a “terrorist act” and ordered the military to be put on high alert, while the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry summoned the Iranian ambassador and gave him a protest note. Azerbaijan also emphasized that the Iranian side must carry out a swift investigation and share their conclusions concerning the drone strikes. As part of its retaliatory measures, Baku closed the Azerbaijan-Iran border checkpoints to all vehicles, including international carriers, cutting off the Iran-Russia land bridge via Azerbaijan, which has been seen as a vital transport link for the Iranian regime since the start of the war. Moreover, the order was given for Azerbaijani diplomats to be evacuated from Iran for safety reasons. Azerbaijan also closed the southern part of its airspace and Baku-Nakhchivan flights were diverted to Igdir in Turkey, which borders Nakhchivan.

DENIAL IS TEHRAN’S STRATEGY TO DODGE RESPONSIBILITY In phone calls with his Azerbaijani counterpart, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi claimed that Iran did not attack Nakhchivan and that the incident would be investigated. Four days after the strikes, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian called Azerbaijan’s President Aliyev and made the same claim that Iran was not involved in the attack and the matter would be investigated. Esmail Baghaei, the spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, further advanced the Islamic Republic’s conspiratorial claims, saying that the attacks on Azerbaijan, Turkey and Cyprus were “false flag” operations. In a post on his X account on 11 February Mohammad Marandi, who acts as an English-language mouthpiece for the regime, described the Gulf Arab states and Azerbaijan as targets of what he called “the day of retribution” planned before the Iran war, indicating that the Nakhchivan strikes were a pre-planned option for the Islamic republic regime in the event of war.

Simultaneously, Turkish media linked to and controlled by the AK Party launched an organised, coordinated media and social media propaganda campaign against Azerbaijan for its defiance in the face of the Iran regime attacks and to advance the Iran regime conspiracy narrative. Baku responded by singling out for criticism media assets linked to Berat Albayrak, Turkish President Erdogan’s son-in-law.

WHY DID IRAN TARGET NAKHCHIVAN? Iran’s drone assaults on Nakhchivan, where there are no foreign military installations, can be understood within the context of the regime inflicting military strikes on neighbouring countries it deems to be “enemies”. The relationship between Iran and Azerbaijan has historically been strained. Tehran seeks to extend its influence into Azerbaijan, which it considers a “fundamental” threat to the Iranian theocracy, given Azerbaijan’s secular Shia majority and the presence of a significant population of Azerbaijanis within Iran. The conflicting national identities and differing foreign policy goals lead to conflicts in their bilateral relations. The drone attacks should be understood within the context of the post-2020 geopolitical shifts in the South Caucasus, and in particular the peace process between Armenia and Azerbaijan mediated by U.S. President Donald Trump. On 8 August 2025 the historic Washington Peace Declaration was signed which includes opening regional transport links. The most significant of those links, the Zangezur Corridor, would run from Azerbaijan through southern Armenia to Azerbaijan’s Nakhchivan exclave with U.S. participation, and was renamed the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP). Nakhchivan plays a central role in the TRIPP project as well as the wider Middle Corridor initiative, anchoring durable peace in the South Caucasus and creating an alternative link bypassing Iran and providing access to Turkey. Thus, the Iranian regime’s deliberate attacks on Nakhchivan were a pre-planned geopolitical move to test Azerbaijan or send a message.

Although future attacks cannot be excluded, Azerbaijan’s resolute position on the unprovoked aggression from Iran on 5 March has shown Baku’s determination to protect and uphold its sovereignty through military readiness and the disruption of the Iran-Russia land transit route. The primary motivation behind Baku’s response to the attacks was to convey that it would not permit a second or third assault, as enduring such attacks, akin to the daily experiences of the Gulf Arab states, is not an option for Azerbaijan. Concurrently, Azerbaijan has shown neutrality by providing humanitarian assistance to ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran. Following assurances made during the telephone conversation between the two countries’ presidents, Pezeshkian and Aliyev, Azerbaijan has resumed flights to Nakhchivan and reopened cargo transit through the Azerbaijan-Iran border.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)