Iran’s concerns about TRIPP cannot be ruled out entirely. However, Tehran’s attitude towards the project has also been shaped by developments that preceded its emergence. According to Iran specialist Alen Shadunts, Azerbaijan was questioning Armenia’s territorial integrity during those years, while differences between Russia’s and Iran’s positions on Armenia had already become apparent at certain stages.
Shadunts said the Iranian side then saw a danger in possible “controlled aggression” by Azerbaijan. This could have threatened southern Armenia and its border connection with Iran. In his assessment, Iran’s calmer response to the presence of European observers, as well as its position on TRIPP, should be understood in this context.
“Iran reacted more calmly to the presence of European monitors, and even the presence of TRIPP was perceived as more tolerable for Iran,” Shadunts said.
Risks to TRIPP if the conflict escalates further
At the same time, he believes the situation remains unstable. If the Iran–US conflict reaches a new level, the possibility that certain regional infrastructure could become a military target cannot theoretically be excluded. Shadunts stressed, however, that he does not currently consider the likelihood of TRIPP becoming a target to be high.
In his view, the danger is that even if Iran’s official position is that TRIPP should not be attacked, individual elements of its current decentralised defence system could reach different decisions.
“Since they have moved to decentralised defence, someone within that mosaic defence structure might think of throwing a stone in TRIPP’s direction as well,” the expert said. According to Shadunts, TRIPP’s proximity to the Iranian border also increases the risk.
Economic infrastructure as a means of pressure
The expert believes Iran’s strategic calculations have also changed during the war. Tehran is paying greater attention to economic disruption, seeking to interfere with the transport links and economic processes on which the regional economy depends.
Shadunts cited attacks on American military bases in the Persian Gulf and the consequences of closing the Strait of Hormuz.
“Attacking American bases in the Persian Gulf did not have as great an impact as closing the Strait of Hormuz and driving up oil prices,” he said.
According to Shadunts, economic pressure lies at the heart of Iran’s calculations. However, he sees another danger: attacks on economic infrastructure and transport links could gradually become a routine instrument of warfare.
“The danger is that attacks on economic infrastructure become commonplace, causing their geographical scope to expand,” the expert said.
He also stressed that although the likelihood of such a scenario is currently low, developments can change rapidly during a war.
👉 Politics