Iranian messages to Yerevan. Is Tehran waiting for a strategic clarification?

Nikol Pashinyan, who went to Iran to participate in the official farewell ceremony of the leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, had a meeting with the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian.

According to the message of the RA government, Pashinyan once again expressed his condolences on the death of the supreme leader of Iran Ali Khamenei, emphasizing that Armenia shares the grief of the people of Iran.

President Pezeshkian thanked and noted that the Islamic Republic of Iran highly appreciates the position adopted by the Government of Armenia and the humanitarian support it has shown towards Iran in a difficult situation.

“The President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Masoud Pezeshkian, congratulated Nikol Pashinyan on his victory in the parliamentary elections and expressed confidence that bilateral relations will continue to develop and strengthen consistently. The parties also exchanged ideas on issues of regional importance, emphasizing the implementation of consistent steps aimed at strengthening peace, stability and regional cooperation,” the RA government’s message said.

It is noteworthy that the message spread by the Iranian side and the key emphasis in President Pezeshkian’s speech were absent from the RA government’s message. Iranian Mehr agency presented the message from the Iranian side, noting that Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian thanked Armenia for its support and expressed solidarity for the country in a difficult period, stressing that the strengthening of relations between Tehran and Yerevan is in the interests of both sides.

According to this report, the president of Iran characterized the relations between Tehran and Yerevan as based on mutual respect, neighborliness and common interests, noting that the countries are constantly expanding constructive cooperation in various fields.

“He also thanked Armenia for its cooperation during the last conflict and expressed hope for the quick conclusion of the negotiations on the bilateral comprehensive cooperation agreement. According to Pezeshkian, this document can open new opportunities for interaction and at the same time strengthen cooperation in the fields of customs, transport, transit, trade and economic relations.

The President of Iran stressed that the relations between Tehran and Yerevan should be free from external interference and should be determined exclusively by the independent will of both countries. He also noted that the presence of forces outside the region often complicates regional problems, rather than contributing to their solution.

Reaffirming the principles of Iran’s foreign policy, Pezeshkian stressed respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states and emphasized Tehran’s commitment to diplomatic settlement of disputes. He also stated that, in his opinion, the main source of instability in West Asia is the Israeli regime, referring to the events that took place in Lebanon, Gaza, Syria and Iran,” said the message from the Iranian side.

Pashinyan’s words were also quoted in the statement. Let’s remind that back in January, Iran’s Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Armenia Khalil Shirgholami said that an agreement on strategic partnership is being prepared. He expressed hope that it will be signed during this year, during a meeting of high-ranking officials.

Pezeshkian’s statement that “relations should be free from external interference and determined exclusively by the independent will of both countries” is not an accidental diplomatic expression. This is similar to another statement made by high-ranking officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the previous period: “the presence of third forces in the region is unacceptable.” Official Tehran did this at the stage when the EU civil observation mission started its activities in RA.

In the Iranian political vocabulary, the concept of “external forces” has a clear addressee. First of all, we are talking about the military-political involvement of the United States, the European Union, NATO’s influence, as well as Israel’s regional presence. This time, Tehran is trying to convey to Yerevan that the Armenian-Iranian agenda should not turn into a platform where third parties can influence the strategic communication of the two countries. This emphasis is heard in the background, when Armenia activates cooperation with the European Union and the United States day by day.

For Iran, the problem is not the fact of cooperation between Armenia and the West. For Iran, it remains a red line that such an architecture should not be formed in the South Caucasus, through which the Western or Israeli influence can directly approach the northern borders of Iran. For that reason, Pezeshkian’s statement should be considered not only as an assessment of Armenian-Iranian relations, but also as another political message of Iran regarding regional security.

It is also noteworthy that in the Iranian message, the topic of foreign intervention follows the section on the comprehensive cooperation agreement. It is obvious that the Iranian side is interested in the process, which was the first to speak publicly about this agreement, and now officially the Iranian side continues the topic. In the context of current Armenia-US, Armenia-EU relations, it is difficult to say when Yerevan will sign such an agreement with Tehran.

However, in the context of current regional realities, the topic of strategic partnership or comprehensive cooperation agreement also becomes important. If the document is signed, it can become not only a legal basis for economic cooperation, but also a political impulse that Armenia is not going to revise its fundamental approaches to Iran, even in the conditions of new foreign policy priorities.

For Tehran, such a document will also be an indicator of confidence that Yerevan continues to consider Iran as a key regional partner. At this stage, this agreement seems to become an important cornerstone in Armenian-Iranian relations, on which the Iranian side will expect progress. There was another remarkable emphasis in Pezeshkian’s statements: the reaffirmation of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states. This wording directly coincides with Iran’s long-standing position, according to which the change of borders in the South Caucasus or the implementation of projects with an extraterritorial logic are unacceptable. Therefore, Tehran actually reaffirms that it continues to consider the issue of territorial integrity of Armenia not only as a component of bilateral relations, but also as part of its own national security system.

All this proves that the Pashinyan-Pezeshkian meeting had a much broader political content than the current meeting. If the Armenian side mainly emphasized sympathy, peace and the general development of bilateral relations, the Iranian message actually included the outline of Iran’s red lines and political expectations. In that sense, the difference between the two messages was political. Yerevan presented its agenda in the message without presenting Tehran’s red lines and positions, while Tehran deliberately emphasized its geopolitical priorities and red lines.

—