Armenian-Iranian drills send strategic signal amid regional volatility
16.04.2025
On April 9–10, 2025, Armenia and Iran conducted what appears to be their first-ever joint military exercise along their shared 44-kilometer border. Billed as a counter-terrorism drill, the maneuver simulated attacks by fictional armed groups on border checkpoints, with each side operating strictly within its own territory. While limited in scale and largely symbolic, the exercise carries important geopolitical weight and signals a new phase in Armenia-Iran relations.
Unlike previous Iranian drills with Azerbaijan, held in 2024 with real joint planning, troop exchanges, and integrated command structures, this exercise was more restrained. Yet in its political message, it may be more consequential.
These Armenian-Iranian drills send a deliberate signal amid a volatile regional climate. Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev has recently renewed threats to forcibly open the so-called “Zangezur corridor,” a project seen by Yerevan and Tehran as a direct challenge to Armenian sovereignty in the Syunik province and a disruption of Iran’s border with Armenia. For Tehran, this border is a red line. Iran has repeatedly made clear that it will not tolerate any attempt to redraw borders in the region.
Iran’s decision to participate in this drill, dispatching elite IRGC forces from Tabriz under General Valiollah Madani, amounts to a warning to Baku and its regional allies. In the current context of rising Israeli-Azerbaijani military cooperation and a fortified Turkish-Azerbaijani axis, Tehran’s quiet, calculated message is unmistakable: the Syunik corridor is off limits.
For Armenia, this exercise comes amid deepening strategic isolation. Since the 2020 war and the fall of Nagorno-Karabakh in September 2023, Yerevan has seen its security environment unravel. Russia, once the guarantor of Armenia’s defense, has been preoccupied and increasingly disengaged. The withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers from Karabakh has left a power vacuum. Turkey has strengthened its military posture in Azerbaijan, which now enjoys overt support from both Pakistan and Israel.
Faced with these pressures, Armenia finds itself forced into a policy of “strategic survival.” The traditional levers of support- Russia, CSTO, and even rhetorical backing from the West- have proven unreliable. France and India have emerged as new partners, but both have limited capacity for direct intervention. Iran, by contrast, offers both proximity and political will. In recent years, Tehran has staged multiple troop deployments near Armenia’s border in response to regional tensions and has expanded energy and trade ties, aiming to boost bilateral trade to $1 billion.
Of course, closer ties with Iran carry their own risks. Iran is a pariah in the West, locked in confrontation with the United States and Israel. Armenia must tread carefully to avoid alienating Western partners or appearing to join any anti-Western bloc. Crucially, Armenia has not signed a military alliance with Iran, does not host Iranian bases, and refrains from anti-American or anti-Israeli rhetoric. Yerevan seeks to maintain its Western vector while hedging through regional cooperation.
Still, choices are limited. Armenia does not enjoy the luxury of choosing between “good” and “bad” partners. It is choosing between survival and erasure. When existential threats come from two neighbors- Azerbaijan and Turkey- and traditional allies abstain from help, strategic pragmatism becomes the only viable doctrine.
In this environment, Iran is not an ideal partner, but a necessary one. It is the only neighbor with both the willingness and the capability to influence outcomes on the ground. The joint military drills, however modest in form, must be read as a product of this grim calculus. They represent an early step in a possible defense partnership, grounded in shared regional concerns and an emerging consensus against border revisionism.
Armenia must continue walking a tightrope: deepening ties with Iran without severing its Western ambitions. If done carefully, this balancing act can help Armenia carve out space for its sovereignty and security in a region where power- not principle- sets the rules. In the face of hybrid threats, information warfare, and conventional military intimidation, survival is a strategy.
Eduard Arakelyan,
RCDS analyst.
The article was originally published on Civilnet.