AZE.US
Attempts to force political change in Iran through external pressure have largely stalled and may even be strengthening internal consolidation within the country, Azerbaijani political analyst Ilgar Velizade said in an interview with the analytical YouTube project Daily Europe Online.
Velizade, who heads the South Caucasus Political Scientists Club, argued that many Western assessments of the Iranian political system rely on simplified assumptions about the country’s internal dynamics.
According to him, expectations that external pressure or military escalation could quickly trigger political collapse in Iran fail to account for the complex structure of Iranian society and the resilience of its state institutions.
“When a country faces an external threat, internal divisions often move to the background,” Velizade said. “What we are seeing instead is a consolidation of public sentiment around the state.”
Ethnic factor often misunderstood
Velizade also criticized the widespread belief that ethnic minorities inside Iran could become a decisive destabilizing force.
He noted that communities often cited in this context – including Azerbaijani Turks and Kurds – are far from politically unified and consist of multiple social and political groups with differing interests.
“In reality there is no single consolidated ‘ethnic bloc’ capable of acting as a unified political force,” he said. “These communities are internally diverse and frequently divided in their views on both domestic and foreign policy.”
Iranian opposition figures lack domestic influence
The analyst also expressed skepticism about attempts in some political circles abroad to promote exiled opposition figures such as Reza Pahlavi as potential leaders of a future Iranian political transition.
Velizade said that figures operating outside Iran lack the political infrastructure and public legitimacy required to unite different opposition groups inside the country.
In his view, the idea that a single opposition personality could quickly consolidate Iranian society after regime change does not reflect political realities on the ground.
Energy markets may feel long-term impact
Velizade warned that the most significant global consequence of the current crisis may be instability in energy markets.
Damage to major oil and gas infrastructure – including refineries, export terminals and transport networks — could have long-lasting effects even after hostilities subside, he said.
“If critical energy facilities are destroyed, restoring them takes months,” Velizade noted. “That means the global market could face shortages long after the conflict itself ends.”
Strike on Nakhchivan remains sensitive issue
Commenting on the recent strike involving the Azerbaijani exclave of Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, Velizade said responsibility ultimately lies with Iran, although the incident may have resulted from decisions taken by local commanders during a period of heightened tension.
At the same time, he stressed that Azerbaijan has no interest in being drawn into a military confrontation with Iran.
“A direct conflict would be extremely dangerous for the region,” Velizade said. “It would essentially mean Azerbaijani communities on both sides of the border confronting each other – a scenario no one in the region wants.”
Rising oil prices reshape geopolitical calculations
Velizade also pointed to rising global energy prices as one of the broader geopolitical consequences of the crisis.
Higher oil and gas prices could benefit major exporters while placing additional pressure on energy-importing economies, particularly in Europe, which is already facing supply constraints.
If the confrontation around Iran continues for several weeks or months, he warned, the economic ripple effects could spread well beyond the Middle East.