OPINION

Tehran’s refusal to curb uranium enrichment or missile development after talks with Washington highlights a deeper reality: diplomacy with Iran has not failed, but it may have reached its structural limits.

Iran is already undergoing internal transformation - and the real question is whether the South Caucasus and the wider Middle East are prepared for the political, economic, and security shifts that may follow.

Rising military tension around Iran is no longer a distant Middle Eastern story. Strategic calculations in Washington, Tel Aviv and Tehran are increasingly reshaping the geopolitical reality of the South Caucasus - a region that could become a critical corridor, buffer, or flashpoint depending on how the crisis unfolds.

When people leave, societies often accuse them of disloyalty. But the real question is not why they go - it is why staying has become so hard. A reflection on migration, choice, and responsibility.

The 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos revealed a decisive turn in global politics, as Washington moved from managing decline narratives to actively reshaping the rules of international leadership-forcing allies and rivals alike to reassess their strategic choices.

Calls to permanent confrontation in the South Caucasus are built on fear, not strategy. In a region defined by limited resources and shifting geopolitics, isolation does not produce security-it produces stagnation. Long-term stability comes from integration, economic links, and managed competition, not from treating cooperation as surrender.

As the Middle East moves away from proxy wars and fragmented control, both Syria and Gaza are increasingly shaped by the same strategic logic: replacing armed movements with governable political structures.

Iran is no longer facing a temporary crisis but a structural dead end. Military pressure has failed, repression has lost its impact, and the political system offers no clear path forward - raising the risk of a far more destructive reckoning ahead.