On August 8, leaders from Azerbaijan, Armenia, and the United States met in Washington, where Nikol Pashinyan and Ilham Aliyev signed a joint declaration under Donald Trump’s patronage.
The agreement establishes the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), granting the US exclusive 99-year development rights for a transit corridor through Armenia to connect Azerbaijan with its Nakhichevan exclave.
Under TRIPP, the US will sublease Armenian territory to a consortium for infrastructure development and management, operating under Armenian law. The planned corridor will eventually include railways, oil and gas pipelines, and fibre optic cables for transporting goods and people.
International media hailed the meeting as a “historic breakthrough” signalling a new peace era in the South Caucasus. But will this US-brokered agreement promote stability or spark new regional tensions?
Regional shifts
The Washington meeting signals a fundamental shift in South Caucasus geopolitics. For years, Russia and Iran have dominated regional influence. The corridor arrangement introduces international control with high risks of becoming a future flashpoint.
The corridor issue emerged from point 9 of the November 9, 2020 Artsakh settlement agreement, which referenced an ‘uninterrupted’ road between Azerbaijan’s eastern and western regions through Armenia’s Syunik region. Azerbaijan and Turkey interpreted this as the ‘Zangezour corridor’.
Iran’s red lines, Russia’s calculated ambiguity
Iran views any Syunik corridor—whether called ‘corridor’, ‘TRIPP’, or ‘route’—as an attempt at isolation and strengthening of the Turkish-Azerbaijani transport axis at Iranian expense. This poses economic, political, and military threats to Tehran.
Iranian officials responded with immediate threats. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reiterated Iran’s rejection of any international border changes. Former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, advisor to Iran’s Supreme Leader, declared: “Iran will block the American corridor to the Caucasus, with or without Russia.”
Most ominously, Revolutionary Guards General Yadulla Javani warned Azerbaijan and Armenia: “We are ready to repeat the fate of Ukraine for you.” A top advisor to Supreme Leader Khamenei emphasized on X: “The Islamic Republic will not tolerate policies or plans that lead to the closing of the Iran-Armenia border.”
Russia’s response proves more ambiguous than Iran’s. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova welcomed the Washington agreements while noting that “tripartite agreements with Moscow’s participation are still in force.”
Russia may pursue behind-the-scenes diplomacy with Turkey, as it has previously. While less determined than Iran currently, Moscow doesn’t want to lose its Syunik foothold. However, Russia might accept the arrangement in exchange for concessions elsewhere, particularly regarding Ukraine.
Turkey’s strategic victory
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan called the Washington Agreement a historic step toward lasting South Caucasus peace. Turkey emerges as the clear winner, gaining the most beneficial regional connection to Azerbaijan and Central Asia while bypassing Iran.
This effectively entrenches Erdogan’s Pan-Turanian vision.
Turkey could also persuade Russia not to obstruct the process by allowing Russian economic and energy interests to flow through Turkey into Europe.
Armenia’s sovereignty concerns
The Washington agreements ignore the release of Armenian prisoners of war in Azerbaijan and the rights of ethnically cleansed Karabakh Armenians. Instead, they largely accommodate Baku’s demands, including Armenian constitutional revision and Minsk Group dissolution—the sole international forum still addressing the conflict.
European Parliament members emphasised the need to resolve Armenian prisoner issues, displaced Karabagh Armenian problems, and complete Azerbaijani withdrawal from Armenian territory.
Armenian opposition views the agreements as undermining state and national interests while striking a blow to sovereignty. They argue these accords create new security challenges, disrupt regional military-political balance, threaten territorial integrity, and question Armenian statehood.
Conversely, Armenian authorities claim the declaration preserves territorial integrity, sovereignty, jurisdiction, and reciprocity principles. Prime Minister Pashinyan emphasized that future solutions must remain within sovereignty, territorial integrity, and jurisdiction frameworks with reciprocity principles.
American expert Scepticism
While Armenian authorities present the Washington Declaration euphorically, American experts see hidden dangers and view it as unwanted US Caucasus interference.
Former State Department advisor James W. Carden believes Trump pursues this for Nobel Prize consideration, but Iran’s reactions suggest the agreement promotes conflict rather than peace. Carden warns that pushing Armenia and Azerbaijan toward NATO membership would cross Iranian and Russian red lines. “If Pashinyan tries to lead Armenia to NATO, a terrible regional war will take place,” with pro-Western forces clashing against Russia and Iran, potentially repeating Ukraine or Syria scenarios.
Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs considers the US South Caucasus actions destabilising and extremely dangerous. “Don’t believe that the United States, especially under Donald Trump, will somehow save you from your neighbors. They will get you into serious troubles. The USA is not interested in the South Caucasus at all, it plays other games.”
Domestic political calculations
Armenian experts believe the US-brokered document serves Pashinyan’s domestic political needs ahead of expected 2026 parliamentary elections. Pashinyan requires any agreement he can ‘sell’ to Armenian voters as a peace treaty or peace guarantee.
However, most Armenians remain skeptical about lasting peace prospects. Recent ARAR Foundation polling shows approximately 65 per cent of Armenians don’t believe stable, lasting peace can be achieved through negotiations with Azerbaijan. Only 34 per cent consider peace achievable.
The question remains whether this Washington-brokered arrangement will deliver the promised peace or become another source of regional instability in the volatile South Caucasus.
Photo: Dreamstime.
