"When Turkey cannot find investment, money pours into Egypt"

Wars often begin with maximalist slogans and end with far more prosaic calculations: whether the minimum set of objectives has been achieved, whether the costs remain acceptable, and whether the campaign itself is beginning to threaten the interests of those who initiated it. Within this logic, a scenario in which the war against Iran is not carried through to the complete collapse of the regime, but instead transitions by the end of March into a pause, a cease-fire, or a limited de-escalation arrangement appears increasingly plausible. Such an outcome would not necessarily be presented as a capitulation by Washington. Rather, it could be framed as the moment when the main objectives have largely been achieved and when further escalation would begin to work against the interests of the United States itself.

The drone strike on Azerbaijan’s Nakhchivan exclave on March 5 prompted sharply different responses from the United States and Russia, revealing competing diplomatic approaches to the growing tensions between Azerbaijan and Iran and underscoring that the South Caucasus has become a new arena of geopolitical rivalry.

The specter of state collapse in the Middle East often brings to mind a single image: the descent of Syria into civil war after 2011. Cities reduced to ruins, foreign powers fighting through their proxies, and a fractured country divided among militias became the defining narrative of the most destructive modern conflict in the region.

The war engulfing Iran is rapidly transforming the strategic landscape of the South Caucasus. For Azerbaijan, the conflict unfolding to its south is not simply another episode of Middle Eastern instability. It represents a structural geopolitical shock that could reshape the country’s security environment, foreign policy orientation and regional role for years to come.