When grand politics takes a sharp turn, it is the voice of the analyst that becomes the compass in a raging storm.

The U.S. strike on Iran on June 22 shook the Middle East and resonated with alarm across the South Caucasus, where geopolitical winds collide with energy routes, and information wars cause no less damage than missiles.

Our guest today is a man who sees beyond the news feed to the map of the future. Arno Khidirbegishvili, General Director and Editor-in-Chief of the Georgian agency GRUZINFORM, and Director of the Center for Security, Strategic Analysis, and Information Policy, is one of the most insightful analysts in the region, known for his precise, well-reasoned, and uncompromising position.

In this exclusive interview, he shares his view on the consequences of the strike on Iran, the potential geopolitical reconfiguration of the South Caucasus, the hidden motives of key players, and the information traps that are easy for countries standing on the geopolitical fault line to fall into.

– Batono Arno, how do you assess the consequences of the U.S. strike on Iran on June 22 in the context of South Caucasus security and the region’s energy stability?

– The situation following the U.S. strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities undoubtedly marks a turning point not only for the Middle East but also for the entire post-Soviet space, including the South Caucasus. We are located near a potential escalation zone, and every such operation increases the risk of third-party involvement — including Georgia and Azerbaijan — in complex geopolitical games.

What is particularly concerning is that such strikes disrupt the fragile balance between the main energy routes passing through the Caucasus. For instance, the transportation of oil and gas along the Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan route and the Southern Gas Corridor could be jeopardized if the conflict expands. This poses not only economic risks but also a threat to regional stability.

In this context, we are witnessing an increase in the diplomatic leverage of regional countries — including Georgia and Azerbaijan — which could serve as a kind of buffer and platform for international negotiations. However, it is crucial to maintain neutrality and not succumb to pressure from external actors — whether the U.S., Israel, or Iran. This is a matter of the strategic survival of the entire region.

– Is it possible that the new wave of tensions in the Middle East could become a catalyst for geopolitical reformatting in the South Caucasus? If so, in whose favor?

– That possibility exists, and it is already beginning to manifest in diplomatic gestures. For example, there are increasing calls to strengthen alternative regional security systems independent of the collective West. This includes expanding the trilateral format of Baku–Ankara–Tbilisi and involving other players, such as Tehran and even Beijing.

If the United States continues to carry out tactical military actions unilaterally — ignoring international law and the positions of regional countries — it will undoubtedly drive Georgia and Azerbaijan to diversify their foreign policy orientations. No one wants to become a victim of someone else’s geopolitics.

A potential reformatting primarily implies a shift toward pragmatic alliances based on the region’s real interests. Sustainable development, transportation connectivity, and energy security are the main priorities. In this regard, Azerbaijan, thanks to its resources and active foreign policy, gains additional geopolitical advantage. Georgia, meanwhile, must carefully navigate between global centers of power to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.

– In your view, what are Israel’s hidden motives in escalating its confrontation with Iran, and how dangerous is this for the Caucasus, where religious and ethnic minorities, including Shiites, reside?

– Israel’s strategy, as I see it, is based on the logic of preemptive deterrence and domestic political considerations. Prime Minister Netanyahu, facing internal political turmoil, is using external conflict as a tool to consolidate society and divert attention from legal challenges against him. This is a familiar formula, seen in many scenarios of the 20th and 21st centuries.

However, if we examine Israel’s actions in a regional context, they set a dangerous precedent. The Caucasus is not an isolated territory. There are Muslim — including Shiite — communities here that are sensitive to events in the Middle East. In Azerbaijan, and to some extent in Georgia (particularly in areas with a Muslim population), there could be a reaction that might affect internal stability.

Therefore, we must act with utmost caution: prevent radicalization, strengthen interfaith and intercultural dialogue, and develop media literacy to avoid manipulation. Geopolitics must not destroy our civilizational identity, and in this context, the responsibility of elites — political, academic, and religious — is growing.

– Do you believe that the U.S. strike on Iran on June 22 is a kind of "new June 22, 1941" in terms of symbolism and information warfare? And how might this be used by Russia in global diplomacy?

– The symbolism of June 22 is a tragic memory, especially for the post-Soviet space. The fact that the U.S. chose this exact date for a missile strike on Iran raises many questions. Even if it is a coincidence, it will be interpreted as an act of deeply cynical demonstration of power — especially in Russian media and political discourse.

Russia is already using this in its diplomatic rhetoric. A strike on Iran on Russia’s “Remembrance Day” is being interpreted as sacrilege, as evidence of Washington’s lack of principles — allegedly ready to trample even sacred historical dates for the sake of its interests. This strengthens Moscow’s position in the Global South, among countries sensitive to neocolonialism and double standards.

It is important for Georgia and Azerbaijan to understand: today’s information war is no less dangerous than military actions. It polarizes, destroys trust, and can have serious political and economic consequences. Therefore, we must preserve our independent judgment, filter external narratives, and uphold peace as a strategic value — especially in such pivotal moments of world history.

News.Az