Evaluating the Iran issue purely from a political or military perspective makes it extremely difficult to predict the causes and consequences of a potential war. The issue is not political; it is fundamentally economic.
Let us explain this through the lens of Fordism and Neo-Fordism since the 1980s. The world is not globalizing; certain corporations are globalizing. The Fordist wave that began with global trade networks later spread to regional production centers. As local firms were integrated into global corporations, capitalism reached its structural peak.
First the United States, then Europe, followed by Japan; after 1980, capital entered countries such as South Korea and Turkey under the name of “foreign investment.” The Soviet Union, which resisted this wave of modernization and capital integration, exhausted itself in the 1990s.
After 1980, capitalism incorporated global economies into its network; between 1980 and 2000, it integrated most regional powers into the system. Yet some regional actors have remained outside this structure. One of them is Iran.
An Economy Not Fully Integrated into the System
Until now, Iran has functioned as a “managed adversary” within the global order. It was used in the pricing of oil and natural gas and in balancing the global trade network. However, it remained an economy where global corporations could not fully penetrate due to its strong public sector dominance.
Approximately:
- 50–60% of Iran’s economy is public,
- 20–30% is semi-public (foundations and entities linked to the Revolutionary Guards),
- 15–25% constitutes the genuine private sector.
Oil and natural gas are entirely under state control. The banking system is largely public. Defense and energy infrastructure are state-centered.
This structure makes Iran one of the rare remaining large public economies that has not been fully absorbed into the global corporate system.
Framed through narratives of nuclear weapons and terrorism, Iran now stands face to face with the United States. What appears political on the surface is, in reality, an economic confrontation.
The Upcoming Process: Two Paths
Iran is likely to face heavy pressure in the coming period.
1️⃣ The Agreement Scenario
If Iran moves toward an agreement with the United States, one or two military sites could be symbolically struck, establishing a balance similar to Iraq. This would be the least bloody path.
Subsequently, sanctions could be eased, the energy sector gradually integrated into the global system, and public assets partially opened to external capital.
This would pave the way for economic integration.
2️⃣ The Defiance and Bloc Alignment Scenario
If Iran resists and fully aligns itself with the BRICS axis, it could mark the beginning of a prolonged war period. China would likely defend its strongest western partner. With Russia also involved, the conflict could last as long as the Ukraine war, yet potentially result in even greater human and material losses.
The region would turn into a heated battlefield. The refugee issue would be the least severe consequence. U.S. military presence in regional countries could become targets for Iran. Nations hosting American bases would watch the situation with deep concern.
Energy corridors, electricity infrastructure, and trade routes would be exposed to significant risk.
Possible Implications for Turkey
U.S.–Iran negotiations continue. However, the second scenario — a prolonged war — remains deeply concerning.
For Turkey, indirect consequences could include:
- Disruptions in energy supply and rising prices
- Refugee movements
- Fluctuations in electricity and energy supply
Imports from Iran — natural gas, petroleum products, plastics, organic chemicals, mineral fuels, fruits, vegetables, nuts, and agricultural goods — could become increasingly difficult.
Our approximately $10 billion, export-oriented trade volume would face serious pressure.
Conclusion
The Iran issue is less a military crisis than a structural limit of global corporate capitalism.
The world is not globalizing; global corporations are expanding.
And every area that cannot be expanded into becomes a potential conflict zone.
Iran stands precisely on that fault line.
Serdar AYDOĞAN 
Yorum bırakın