"A peace treaty is essential for Armenia's integration into infrastructure projects" Expert opinions on Caliber.Az

Recent ill-founded statements of US Assistant Secretary of State James O'Brien at the hearings of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs were considered in Baku as a blow to relations between Azerbaijan and the United States.

There is a sense that Washington is rudely trying to form a new roadmap for the development of the South Caucasus without bothering to learn Baku's opinion. Thus, according to O'Brien, "Central Asia is looking for new routes for its goods and these routes can go south, through Armenia". The State Department believes that "this particular route of the corridor could cause a huge economic boom for the countries of the region, as well as in the world markets". But O'Brien "cast aside" the corridor through Iran. Moreover, Washington offers Baku to "think carefully about the expediency of such a project".

What kind of game is the US playing in our region? Why is Washington suddenly concerned about logistics in our region passing through Armenia? Caliber.Az asked foreign political analysts to address these questions.

According to Saken Mukan, Professor of the Department of Media Communication and History of Kazakhstan at IITU in Almaty, the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route is indeed the most favourable for Central Asian countries, particularly Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan is preparing programmes aimed at boosting funding for projects within the Middle Corridor. This, in particular, was also stated by the Vice Minister of the National Economy of Kazakhstan Bauyrzhan Kudaibergenov on the margins of the II Baku Forum on Sustainable Development.

"Taking into account the recent geopolitical events, the importance of the Middle Corridor is increasing. Therefore, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan are betting on the Middle Corridor," the political scientist quoted the vice-minister as saying.

Also, according to him, work is underway to expand the port of Kuryk on the Caspian Sea, build roads, expand infrastructure from the border with China to the port of Kuryk, through which goods will be sent via Azerbaijan and Georgia to Turkey and Europe.

"Interestingly, according to Kudaibergenov, the technical and economic procedures are being carried out much faster than expected based on the results of agreements during Tokayev's official visit to Baku in August 2022, as well as Aliyev's visits to Astana," the political analyst stressed.

But at the same time, as Mukan notes, a peace treaty is essential for Armenia's integration into infrastructure projects as long-term guarantees are needed so that the interested parties do not become hostages of political differences.

"However, Armenia is delaying the signing of the peace treaty. In addition, we see Yerevan's perpetual hostile rhetoric and its unwillingness to see Russia as a security guarantor for the Armenian part of the corridor. Why has Armenia decided to revise the 9th point of the Trilateral Statement and now wants to control the corridor section with its own security forces, specially created for this purpose? Why does Yerevan dislike the Russian military? Believe me, all these issues are of concern to the states on the other side of the Caspian Sea because the main thing for them is the safety of cargo and people. And the guarantees Armenia provides are extremely weak.

Therefore, it is not quite clear how the US is so sure that the corridor should pass through Armenia. I think that the project of the corridor along the Araz River through the territory of Iran seems to be a safer and more reliable option at the moment. Moreover, its construction has already started. In this regard, I would like to note that any American presence or pressure on Baku from Washington is unacceptable, at the diplomatic level or on the eve of elections in this country, the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of the states of the region should be observed," Mukan noted.

At the same time, in the opinion of Daniyal Ranjbar Meshkin, an Iranian expert on the Middle East and assistant at the Department of Theory and History of International Relations at the Patrice Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University of Russia, James O'Brien's statement is related to complex geopolitical strategies and considerations. In particular, the United States, by making such statements, is trying to increase its influence in the Caucasus and Central Asia. This region is of significant geopolitical interest because of its location (Heartland Maritime roots), resources and proximity to Russia, China and Iran. The US is keen to shape the political and economic landscape in a way that suits its interests and values.

"There are balancing principles here: the US is trying to balance its many interests in this way. On the one hand, they seek to influence regional dynamics; on the other hand, they need to avoid confrontation with other major players such as China, Turkey, Russia and Iran.

There is also such a factor as 'promoting peace and economic stability' in the US game. By advocating peaceful solutions and condemning the use of force, the US is trying to present itself as a proponent of stability and economic prosperity in the region. Of course, this approach combined with the US sanctions policy against Russia, Iran and other countries cannot fix the US image in the world community.

In an attempt to establish its influence in Central Asian countries, the US promises all kinds of 'help', but its main goal is to obtain certain benefits, in particular, access to the market, perhaps even the establishment of military bases," the political scientist said.

In his opinion, it is clear that the US wants to be the main arbiter. At the same time, they do not want the three South Caucasus states to solve issues on their own.

"The geopolitics of the region is complex and various forces are involved. The route through Armenia could be seen as a rapprochement between Yerevan and the Western centres of power. Conversely, a route through Iran could bring the CA countries closer together with Iranian and possibly Russian interests, as Iran has strong ties with Russia.

Meanwhile, the stability and security of the transit route is of paramount importance. If a route is perceived to be politically or militarily unstable, it is unlikely that anyone will choose to rely on it for critical trade. The history of conflict in the region, especially between Armenia and Azerbaijan, may affect the perception of the long-term viability of the corridor. Although, on the other hand, diplomatic relations between Central Asian countries and Armenia or Iran will also play a role. These countries will weigh the advantages and disadvantages of closer cooperation with Armenia or Iran, taking into account the potential diplomatic implications," the political analyst said.

Central Asian countries, he said, may also see the choice of corridor as a matter of asserting their regional influence and independence. They will prefer a path that will strengthen their geopolitical position rather than one that will make them more dependent on major powers.

"It is important to note here that the US is playing a classic game in the region. They are trying to create difficulties and then conflicts to manage processes in the region. By imposing sanctions against the main players in the region - Russia and Iran - the US wants to consolidate its influence and achieve its goals. Iran has always noted that stability, security, economic cooperation and good-neighbourliness can be achieved only by the countries of the region, without the participation of extra-regional actors," Daniyal Ranjbar Meshkin summed up.