An analysis by Responsible Statecraft has highlighted growing efforts in the US and the Israeli occupation to integrate Azerbaijan into the Abraham Accords, a move that appears aimed at escalating pressure on Iran.

The report, published Monday, suggests that while Azerbaijan already enjoys strong ties with the Israeli occupation, its formal inclusion in the accords could serve to deepen trilateral cooperation with the US, potentially entangling Washington in new geopolitical tensions.

The analysis notes that a campaign advocating for Azerbaijan’s inclusion has gained momentum in recent weeks. Influential figures, including rabbis with close ties to former President Donald Trump’s administration, have endorsed the move, and major publications such as The Wall Street Journal and Forbes have amplified the message. The Israeli think tank Begin-Sadat Center has also argued that Baku would be a fitting addition to the accords.

However, Responsible Statecraft questions the necessity of this push, given that Azerbaijan is already a key Israeli ally, supplying up to 40% of the occupation's oil and receiving advanced weaponry that played a decisive role in its wars against Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh. The report suggests that the real motivation behind the effort is to align US policy more closely with Israeli-Azerbaijani interests, particularly in countering Iran.

Regional alliance to pressure Iran?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office has explicitly stated its desire to establish a "strong foundation for trilateral collaboration" between the US, the Israeli occupation, and Azerbaijan. An op-ed in The Wall Street Journal by Seth Cropsey and Joseph Epstein further emphasized that such an alliance would help increase pressure on Iran’s northern border.

Yet, the report highlights a major obstacle: Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act, which restricts US military assistance to Azerbaijan due to its past conflicts with Armenia. Successive US administrations have waived the provision since the early 2000s, citing Azerbaijan’s strategic cooperation, but efforts are now underway to repeal it entirely.

Advocates argue that an anticipated peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan justifies the repeal, though Responsible Statecraft notes that Baku has continued to stall negotiations, potentially to extract further concessions from Armenia.

Azerbaijani territorial ambitions

The report also details how Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev has laid claims to Armenia’s Syunik province, a key geopolitical region bordering Iran. This area, referred to as Zangezur in Azerbaijan, is seen as critical for expanding Azerbaijani-Turkish connectivity.

Iran has strongly opposed any border changes, warning that it would take military action if necessary. Tehran has already conducted large-scale military exercises near its border with Azerbaijan, which appears to have deterred Baku’s ambitions, the report said.

According to Responsible Statecraft, pushing Azerbaijan into the Abraham Accords could embolden Baku to adopt a more confrontational stance toward Iran while also advancing long-standing neoconservative strategies of stoking ethnic and religious divisions within Iran.

US-based groups like the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Hudson Institute, along with their Israeli counterparts, according to the report, have long supported encouraging Iran’s Azeri minority to rise against the Islamic Republic.

New entanglements?

The report questions whether such a move aligns with US interests, arguing that entrenching Washington in another regional conflict could lead to unnecessary military entanglements. It also points to Azerbaijan’s authoritarian governance, human rights abuses, and the recent mass displacement of Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh as reasons to reconsider deeper strategic ties.

Earlier this month, Trump told Fox News that he had sent a letter to Sayyed Ali Khamenei, urging Iran to begin nuclear deal talks or face military action. In parallel, the US imposed new sanctions on Iran as part of Trump's "maximum pressure" policy.

However, Iran has stated that it will not engage in talks with the US under pressure or threats, and is currently considering its response to Trump's letter, which was seen as both a threat and an offer of potential opportunities.

In the interview, the foreign minister explained that Iran's refusal to negotiate with the US stems from historical experience, not stubbornness. He emphasized that Iran had previously used diplomacy to its fullest to lift the sanctions imposed on the country.

Iran entered the negotiations for the 2015 nuclear deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, with good faith. "After the agreement, we adhered to all our commitments in good faith. Who betrayed diplomacy here? It was the US that abandoned all this and went back to another path. This has created some distrust," he said.