It should be signed by the heads of our states in front of TV cameras. That would send a stronger signal to Baku than arranging our military equipment along the border when they know that we won't cross the border because of the reasons I mentioned earlier.
Yet Iran's present military deployment is far from useless. As per the "Tweet" shared by Stryker1982, Keyhan warned of a possible imminent plan by the so-called Republic of Azarbaijan to invade Armenian territory in Syunik province. The deployment of Iranian armed forces along the border will serve as a strong deterrent against precisely this eventuality (among other possible benefits).
- - - - -
Iranian Azeri’s make up a significant part of the population of Iran and Iranian Armenians a much smaller portion.
Iran was so self conscious of this that Iranian clerics and lawmakers were quick to reference solidarity with Iranian Azeris over the Azeri-Armani conflict.
For crying out loud, Iran’s SL is Azeri and speaks Azeri and said Azeri lands should be liberated.
Iran's choice not to intervene on behalf of Armenia in the recent Karabakh war was strictly unrelated to ethnic considerations. The notion that Iran backed down due to "ethnic" issues has in fact been promoted by Iran's enemies who have been trying hard to "ethnicize" the social and political fabric of Iran as a preulde to territorial balkanization - whereas in reality, "ethnicity" is of no relevance to politics in a nation as integrated as Iran. So narratives like these shouldn't be entertained.
They are as unjustified as Zahra Rahnavard's contention that Ahmadinejad coming out on top in East Azarbaijan province at the 2009 presidential election was supposedly an indication for "fraud" given that her spouse Mir Hossein Mousavi is Azari - this argument was extensively debunked back then by referencing former election results in various Iranian provinces: Iranian citizens don't vote for candidates because of their "ethnicity", but due to their political program. The Iranian polity is not fragmented along linguistic lines, and common citizenship supersedes other factors.
Iran's stance during the latest conflict in the south Caucasus was grounded in other criteria: first and foremost the Pashinyan government's marked rapprochement with the US and Isra"el"i regimes, second the fact that international law actually vindicated the Azari side, then you also had Iran's relationship with Turkey including with regards to the Syrian situation, and also a desire not to get involved in yet another front unless absolutely necessary, given economic circumstances and simultaneous Iranian presence in several other theaters, etc.
Iran’s SL would, the most powerful man in Iran. nd he has final say. Unless Israel attacks Iran from Azerbaijan or Azerbaijan attacks Iran very overtly (not a mere border guard skirmish/scuffle), then there is almost 0% chance he will betray his lineage.
So-called "ethnic" considerations play no role in the Supreme Leader's decision making. He will definitely order any type of action considered necessary against the so-called Republic of Azarbaijan.
Iran generally speaking does not and will not launch wars of aggression independently of the target.
Also Iran's hostility is never directed against peoples nor nations per se, but exclusively against oppressive regimes as well as elements which assist said oppressors. Resisting such regimes is not seen as betrayal. And Iran has pretty much been countering the pro-zionist regime of Baku, for example through its support of religiously-minded Islamic local forces such as the grand social movements based off Nardaran (a religiously-inclined suburb of Baku) challenging the ultra-secularist and authoritarian rule of the Aliyevs, protesting the hijab ban and the jailing of Muslim clerics by the regime etc.
Another way Iran could step in would be to extend support to representatives of linguistic minorities of Aran, mainly but not limited to the Talesh community, some of whose prominent members faced repression at the hands of Baku authorities.
Then there's the not often talked about Hoseinyun Brigade which consists of citizens of the Republic of Azarbaijan trained by the IRGC who joined the Resistance in Syria. In case of an exacerbated crisis between Iran and Baku, we might be hearing of the Hoseynyun.
So Iran under Supreme Leader Khamenei has taken various measures indeed to keep in check threats emanating from Baku. Offensive war however is never in the cards.
- - - - -
Persians and Kurds are over 75% of Iran's population. Both of them wouldn't mind supporting Armenia. I doubt Arabs, Lurs or Baluchis would give a f*ck either.
Same as above, Iranians do not determine their political positioning on the basis of so-called "ethnicity". Which when it comes to Iran happens in fact to be a largely bogus concept to begin with.
First because genetically speaking, almost all so-called "ethnicities" in Iran are practically identical to each other. Second because the shared national cultural heritage of Iranians is simply undeniable and massive.
Third and most importantly, because over 50% of Iranians have mixed linguistic origins. Indeed, the largest "ethnic" group in Iran is neither Persian, nor Azari, nor Kurdish nor any of these, but mixed Iranian. By mixed I do not mean that there is foreign, non-Iranian influx but am referring to Iranians whose ancestors belong to more than one of the country's existing linguistic groups.
We could test this right here, by putting the question to the 20-25 active Iranian users of this forum - just how many of these can honestly claim that all their four grand-parents have their roots in one single linguistic community? Aryobarzan already mentioned he is of both Azari Iranian and Persian Iranian lineage. My Iranian family is very mixed as well, with roots in at least three different linguistic groups. 2:0.
Most Iranians cannot be artificially squeezed into a so-called "ethnic" sub-category. This is a fact which enemies attempting to divide Iranians along "ethnic" lines must be slapped with again and again. It is the single most powerful objective argument against hostile separatist and "ethnicist" discourse.
Iranian citizens across all linguistic lines would overwhelmingly back their motherland against any foreign adversary, no matter the identity of said adversary. To the Iranian people Islam and Iran come first, not so-called "ethnicity".
there are doubts about Khamenei's lineage. Some say that he is in fact from the Khorasan region of Iran and his father lived in Khameneh only temporarily. Nevertheless, Khamenei is a practical man.
There has been a local Azari-speaking community in Mashhad for centuries. They chose to settle in the vicinity of the holy shrine for mostly religious reasons. However it wouldn't make a difference either way since so-called "ethnicity" has no bearing on policy making in Iran.
- - - - -
Thinking realistically and accepting the sovereignty of neighbouring countries is best for Iran.
And also for the regime in Baku. Tolerating zionist-sponsored separatist incitement or hosting Mossad and "I"DF elements on their soil against Iran will not help enhance bilateral relations.
