The Iran-Russia-Turkey Nexus: Power Plays & Shifting Sands

Prof. Waino Jacobi PhD 22 Jun 2025

In the intricate dance of international relations, few geopolitical constellations are as complex and consequential as the evolving relationship between Iran, Russia, and Turkey. This powerful trio, often seen as a counterweight to Western influence in the Middle East and beyond, navigates a landscape rife with shared interests, strategic partnerships, and underlying tensions. Understanding the dynamics of the Iran-Russia-Turkey axis is crucial for anyone seeking to grasp the future trajectory of regional stability and global power shifts.

Far from a monolithic alliance, the bond between these three nations is characterized by a pragmatic convergence of interests, particularly in areas where their objectives align with challenging the established global order or asserting regional dominance. From coordinating efforts in war-torn Syria to forging new economic pathways and even condemning shared adversaries, their interactions paint a vivid picture of a multipolar world in the making. Yet, beneath the surface of cooperation lie significant fissures, reflecting their distinct national agendas and historical rivalries. This article delves into the multifaceted relationship of Iran, Russia, and Turkey, exploring their collaborations, contentions, and their collective impact on the geopolitical chessboard.

A Trilateral Tapestry: Unraveling the Iran-Russia-Turkey Dynamic
The Syrian Crucible: Forging a Pragmatic Partnership
Economic Ambitions and Geopolitical Realities
Navigating Regional Flashpoints: Israel and Beyond
Fissures and Fault Lines: Internal Tensions
Turkey's Balancing Act: NATO Member and Regional Player
Countering Western Influence: A Shared Strategic Imperative
The Path Forward: Can These Powers Broker Peace?

A Trilateral Tapestry: Unraveling the Iran-Russia-Turkey Dynamic

The relationship between Iran, Russia, and Turkey is a complex mosaic, woven from threads of historical animosity, strategic necessity, and economic opportunity. While each nation possesses its own unique geopolitical aspirations and historical grievances, a pragmatic alignment has emerged, driven by a shared desire to reshape the regional order and, to varying degrees, to counter Western influence. This convergence of interests has seen the three powers engage in coordinated diplomatic and military actions, particularly in areas like the Middle East and the Caucasus. The strategic partnership between Russia, Iran, and Turkey, highlighted in various policy briefs, is indeed aimed at creating a new economic order in the Caucasus region and countering Western influence. This grand ambition, however, is frequently tested by individual national interests that sometimes diverge sharply.

Historical Roots and Evolving Alliances

Historically, Russia, Iran (Persia), and Turkey (Ottoman Empire) have been rivals, often clashing over territorial control, trade routes, and regional hegemony. From the Russo-Turkish Wars to the Great Game in Central Asia, their past is replete with conflicts. However, the turn of the 21st century, marked by a shifting global power balance and the rise of new challenges, has necessitated a re-evaluation of these historical animosities. The common ground found in opposing certain Western policies, particularly those spearheaded by the United States, has paved the way for a more cooperative, albeit cautious, relationship. This newfound pragmatism does not erase centuries of rivalry but rather overlays it with a layer of strategic expediency, where temporary alliances are forged to achieve specific, often overlapping, objectives. The current Iran-Russia-Turkey dynamic is a testament to this evolving geopolitical landscape, where old foes can become reluctant partners.

The Syrian Crucible: Forging a Pragmatic Partnership

Perhaps the most prominent arena where the Iran-Russia-Turkey relationship has solidified is the Syrian conflict. What began as a complex civil war evolved into a proxy battleground for regional and global powers. In this crucible, Moscow, Tehran, and Ankara found common cause in stabilizing the Syrian state, albeit with different endgames in mind. Russia, seeking to retain influence in the Middle East months after the fall of Assad (referring to the initial phase of the conflict and Russia's enduring commitment), became a crucial military backer of the Syrian regime. Iran, for its part, provided significant ground support through its proxies and Revolutionary Guard forces, aiming to secure its strategic depth and maintain a land bridge to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Turkey, while initially backing opposition groups, eventually shifted its focus to preventing the emergence of an autonomous Kurdish entity on its southern border, finding a pragmatic partner in Russia and Iran to achieve this objective.

The Astana Process: A Framework for Dialogue

The shared, though often divergent, interests in Syria led to the establishment of the Astana peace process in 2017. This trilateral format saw Turkey, Russia, and Iran regularly hold talks on Syria's future, aiming to engineer a political resolution. While NATO member Turkey backs the political and humanitarian aspects, its military interventions in northern Syria have been largely tolerated by Moscow and Tehran, indicating a complex balancing act. The importance of restarting the Syrian political process was stressed at a meeting of Turkey, Russia, and Iran in Doha on a recent Saturday, a Turkish foreign ministry source also said, adding that the continued dialogue is vital. However, the path has not been smooth. When Turkey, Iran, and Russia tried to engineer peace talks in Kazakhstan in 2017, the result was political deadlock, primarily because the country was divided geographically between different factions, making a unified political solution elusive. Despite these challenges, the Astana process remains a crucial platform for these three powers to coordinate their efforts and manage their competing interests in Syria, preventing direct confrontation and fostering a degree of predictability in a highly volatile region.

Economic Ambitions and Geopolitical Realities

Beyond military and diplomatic coordination, the Iran-Russia-Turkey nexus is increasingly defined by ambitious economic projects and deepening trade ties. These economic partnerships are not merely about commerce; they are integral to the broader strategic goal of countering Western economic dominance and establishing a new multipolar economic order. Russia, for instance, has long had a robust relationship with Iran, becoming the country’s largest foreign investor last year. This investment spans various sectors, including energy, infrastructure, and defense, providing Iran with crucial economic lifelines amidst stringent Western sanctions. The economic ties serve as a foundation for their strategic alignment, demonstrating a tangible commitment to their partnership.

Russia's Investment and Arms Supply to Iran

The economic relationship between Russia and Iran extends significantly into the military sphere. Russia has supplied arms to Iran for years, bolstering its defense capabilities and helping it modernize its armed forces. This military cooperation is a cornerstone of their strategic partnership, enabling Iran to project power and deter potential adversaries. However, it's also noted that Russia has stopped short of providing the full spectrum of advanced weaponry that Iran might desire, indicating a degree of strategic caution on Moscow's part, likely to avoid escalating regional tensions or provoking a stronger Western response. This nuanced approach highlights the pragmatic limits of their cooperation, where Russia balances its support for Iran with broader geopolitical considerations. The flow of investment and military hardware from Russia to Iran underscores the depth of their commitment to each other, even as they navigate complex regional dynamics and international pressures.

Navigating Regional Flashpoints: Israel and Beyond

The Middle East is a region perpetually on edge, and the Iran-Russia-Turkey trio often finds itself directly or indirectly involved in its myriad conflicts. One of the most sensitive flashpoints involves Israel. China, Russia, and Turkiye have collectively condemned Israel’s actions, particularly in recent conflicts involving Gaza and other Palestinian territories. This unified stance reflects a shared critical view of Israeli policies and a desire to champion the Palestinian cause, aligning with a broader anti-Western narrative. However, the situation is more complex than a simple condemnation. Beijing and Moscow, for instance, maintain economic and political ties with both Iran and Israel, demonstrating a pragmatic foreign policy that allows them to engage with all parties in the region. This dual engagement provides them with leverage and influence, enabling them to play a mediating role or at least to avoid being drawn exclusively into one side of a conflict. Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a phone call with his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, discussed the latest geopolitical developments, particularly after Israel launched its war against Iran, highlighting the immediate and high-level attention these flashpoints receive from the leadership of Iran, Russia, and Turkey. The question then arises: what, if anything, can these powers do to end the cycles of violence? Their ability to influence outcomes is constrained by their own interests and the deep-seated nature of the conflicts, yet their collective voice carries significant weight on the international stage.

Fissures and Fault Lines: Internal Tensions

Despite their areas of cooperation, the Iran-Russia-Turkey relationship is far from monolithic. There are major fissures between the countries, reflecting their distinct national interests, historical rivalries, and competing geopolitical ambitions. These internal tensions often surface in regions where their spheres of influence overlap or where their strategic objectives diverge. While they may present a united front against certain external pressures, the underlying competition for regional dominance remains a constant factor. These disagreements are not merely minor diplomatic spats; they can, at times, threaten to undermine the broader strategic alignment that has characterized their recent interactions. The complexity of the Iran-Russia-Turkey dynamic lies precisely in this interplay of cooperation and competition.

The Zangezur Corridor: A Point of Contention

A prime example of these internal tensions is the dispute over the Zangezur Corridor. The latest example of this are tensions between Iran and Russia over a plan by Azerbaijan and Turkey for a land link across the Southern Caucasus known as the Zangezur Corridor, linking the Caspian Sea to Turkey through Armenia's Syunik province. This proposed corridor, while ostensibly about economic connectivity, holds significant geopolitical implications. Turkey and Azerbaijan view it as a vital link for trade and energy, enhancing their regional influence. Russia has supported the Turkish and Azerbaijani Zangezur corridor plan, seeing it as a potential economic boon and a way to increase its own regional connectivity. However, this support has drawn a diplomatic rebuke from Iran in 2024. Iran views the corridor as a threat to its borders, its trade routes with Armenia, and its strategic access to the Caucasus. Tehran fears that the corridor could cut off its land access to Europe via Armenia and strengthen a Turkish-Azerbaijani axis that could undermine Iranian influence in the region. This disagreement over the Zangezur Corridor vividly illustrates how shared strategic goals can be overshadowed by competing national interests, forcing the Iran-Russia-Turkey axis to navigate delicate diplomatic tightropes.

Turkey's Balancing Act: NATO Member and Regional Player

Turkey's position within this trilateral dynamic is particularly unique and complex. As a long-standing NATO member, Ankara is ostensibly aligned with the Western bloc, sharing defense commitments and democratic values with its European and North American allies. Yet, under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey has increasingly pursued an independent foreign policy, often diverging from NATO and EU positions. This has led to a strategic rapprochement with Russia and Iran, particularly in areas like Syria, energy cooperation, and defense procurement. While NATO member Turkey backs the political and humanitarian efforts in Syria, its willingness to engage with Moscow and Tehran on regional issues, even to the point of purchasing Russian S-400 missile systems, highlights its pragmatic approach to foreign policy. Turkey's readiness for mediation alongside Russia in various regional conflicts further underscores its role as a bridge between East and West, and sometimes, a challenger to both. This balancing act allows Turkey to leverage its unique geopolitical position, pursuing its national interests while maintaining a degree of strategic autonomy. The Iran-Russia-Turkey relationship is thus not just about counter-Western influence, but also about a NATO member charting its own course in a multipolar world.

Countering Western Influence: A Shared Strategic Imperative

Despite their internal differences, a fundamental shared objective that binds Iran, Russia, and Turkey is the desire to reduce Western, particularly American, influence in their respective spheres of interest. This imperative manifests in various forms, from diplomatic coordination in international forums to the establishment of alternative economic and security architectures. The attack on Iran, for instance, sees Russia scrambling to retain influence in the Middle East, a region where Western powers have historically held sway. Similarly, Turkey's independent foreign policy often serves to assert its autonomy from traditional Western alliances. The shared condemnation of Israel's actions by China, Russia, and Turkiye is another example of this collective pushback against a Western-backed regional actor. This overarching goal provides a strong strategic glue for the Iran-Russia-Turkey relationship, even when other interests diverge.

Shaping a New Economic Order in the Caucasus

A key aspect of countering Western influence involves creating alternative economic structures and trade routes. A policy brief highlights the strategic partnership between Russia, Iran, and Turkey, aimed at creating a new economic order in the Caucasus region. This vision involves developing new transportation corridors, energy pipelines, and trade agreements that bypass traditional Western-dominated routes and institutions. The Zangezur Corridor, despite being a point of contention, is ironically part of this broader ambition for enhanced regional connectivity that could reduce reliance on Western infrastructure. By fostering greater economic interdependence among themselves and with other non-Western powers, the Iran-Russia-Turkey axis seeks to build a more resilient and independent economic bloc. This is not merely about trade; it is about establishing a geopolitical reality where their collective economic power can challenge the existing global financial and trade architecture, thereby reducing Western leverage and promoting a more multipolar world order.

The Path Forward: Can These Powers Broker Peace?

The Iran-Russia-Turkey relationship is a dynamic and evolving phenomenon, characterized by both strategic convergence and inherent competition. While they have demonstrated a capacity for pragmatic cooperation, particularly in Syria and in challenging Western hegemony, their individual national interests often create significant friction. Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, along with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, represent leaders grappling with complex geopolitical challenges. The question remains: what, if anything, can these powers do to end the persistent conflicts in their shared neighborhood? Turkey, ready for mediation alongside Russia, often positions itself as a peacemaker, but the effectiveness of their collective efforts is limited by the very fissures that exist between them. The past attempts, like the 2017 peace talks in Kazakhstan, resulted in political deadlock, largely because the country was divided geographically between different factions, highlighting the difficulty of imposing solutions from outside. While they can influence the trajectory of conflicts and create platforms for dialogue, their ability to broker lasting peace is often constrained by their own competing agendas and the deep-seated nature of regional rivalries. The future of the Iran-Russia-Turkey nexus will likely continue to be defined by this delicate balance between cooperation and competition, shaping the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East and beyond for years to come.

Conclusion

The intricate dance between Iran, Russia, and Turkey represents a significant force in contemporary geopolitics. From their coordinated efforts in Syria through the Astana process to their shared ambition of fostering a new economic order in the Caucasus and countering Western influence, their pragmatic partnership has reshaped regional dynamics. However, as explored, this alliance is far from seamless, marked by notable fissures such as the contentious Zangezur Corridor project and their differing approaches to regional flashpoints. Turkey's unique position as a NATO member further complicates this already multifaceted relationship, showcasing a remarkable balancing act between traditional alliances and emergent strategic partnerships.

Ultimately, the Iran-Russia-Turkey nexus is a testament to the complexities of a multipolar world, where old rivalries give way to new, often temporary, alliances driven by shared strategic imperatives. Understanding these nuanced interactions is vital for anyone interested in the future of global power dynamics and regional stability. What are your thoughts on the long-term implications of this powerful trio? Share your insights in the comments below, and don't forget to explore other articles on our site for more in-depth geopolitical analysis.

Iran says no to nuclear talks during conflict as UN urges restraint

HeadlineSphere