Experts debate Zangezur corridor's viability amid Armenia's futile "Crossroads of Peace" Armenia's populism stifles regional development

Armenia continues promoting its “Crossroads of Peace” project on international platforms.

During his European tour, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan has recently called for support for this project.

According to Armenian media, he discussed the prospects of “Crossroads of Peace” at a meeting with colleagues from Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina - Gordan Grlić Radman and Elmedin Konakovic.

Earlier, while participating in the round table discussions at the International Centre for Defence and Security (ICDS) think tank in Estonia, Mirzoyan said that international partners evaluate this initiative positively.

He emphasised that the project demonstrates Armenia’s commitment to the peace agenda and its readiness to ensure the stable development of the region.

Why does Armenia promote the “Crossroads of Peace” project, which is a dead-end in essence and content? There is an easier and more efficient Zangezur corridor - the most optimal transport project from the point of view of logistics and self-sufficiency. Who needs such a double game?

The Azerbaijani and Russian experts answered Caliber.Az journalist’s questions.

Head of the Azerbaijani Centre for Studies of the South Caucasus Farhad Mammadov has said that the “Crossroads of Peace” project has been elevated to almost a national idea in Armenia, and it constantly appears in Yerevan’s foreign policy rhetoric.

“The ‘Crossroads of Peace’ implies the opening of routes between Azerbaijan and Türkiye in the East-West vector, as well as in the North-South vector. It also includes a section of the corridor from Azerbaijan, passing through Armenia, and further to Nakhchivan and Iran. After the commissioning of this section, the Armenians plan to increase cargo flow in the North-South vector,” he said.

“The only question is that Yerevan knows well that it is necessary to give consent to the construction of the Zangezur corridor for the implementation of the ‘Crossroads of Peace’. First of all, the Azerbaijani President noted that without the beginning of work in this direction, no other route will be open. This means that the road between Armenia and Türkiye will not be open,” Mammadov noted.  

“Thus, all this propaganda of the ‘Crossroads of the World’ comes down to one simple issue - the topic of opening the Zangezur corridor, and the Armenian leadership knows what should be done for this purpose. However, there is still a problem. In fact, the Armenians continue delaying the launch of the Zangezur corridor, so any ‘Crossroads of Peace’ now is just populism of Yerevan,” Mammadov added.

Russian political analyst and publicist Ruslan Safarov has said that there are two important aspects in the “Crossroads of Peace” – technical, as well as geo-economic and geopolitical.

“The bottom line is that Armenia cannot become this crossroads because even in the Soviet period, when no money was spared on infrastructure projects, no one built a road from present-day Sisian to Meghri because these are the mountains of the Lesser Caucasus. Of course, it is possible to build it, but it will be a completely ‘golden route’ and the money to be spent for it will be obtained within a few thousand years. To build such a railway, it is necessary to build many tunnels. This requires enormous funding, and no one knows where to get it from. So, of course, the road going through southern Zangezur is much more profitable and easier. There is more than one option, but Azerbaijan offers this direction as the optimal one,” Safarov noted.

He said that the geopolitical factor should be mentioned. It is impressive in scale. All global players are showing interest in it because the South Caucasus is a key link in routes throughout Eurasia. First of all, China shows a great interest. It sees the corridor through the South Caucasus as the most profitable onshore alternative to all sea transportation routes, which can always be taken under control by China’s main and clear rival - the US, as well as other onshore routes through Russia or through Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Iran.

“Russia should be also taken into account with its International North-South Transport Corridor, which urgently needs routes towards the Indian Ocean. One way or another, Moscow is establishing a strategic partnership with Tehran, even to the point of entering into allied relations. All this is not accidental. However, the point is that among all the routes to Iran through Georgia, Armenia, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, or by sea along the Caspian Sea, the most attractive one from a logistics point of view is the fourth one - through Azerbaijan because it is necessary to cross the territory of one country to get to Iran from Russia,” Safarov said.

“The rest routes even through the Caspian Sea, which is also divided into international sectors, are problematic which means that there are many more problems, namely, borders and customs obstacles. However, from a geopolitical point of view, Russia also has plans to use a corridor through Georgia, Armenia and Iran. Russia is strengthening relations with Georgia, and in this context, Moscow has the idea of connecting Georgia, Armenia and Iran with a single route,” the expert noted.

“When it is clear who benefits from this, it is worth asking other questions. Who creates the problems in the South Caucasus? Who doesn’t need North-South route or East-West routes? The most important world player - the US does not need them,” Safarov said.

“Russia and Iran are under US sanctions. Why should they build routes and help each other? Of course, this is not beneficial for the US. The US does not want to help China build a new Silk Road and therefore, the US launched several processes to implement its plans. France leads these processes. The idea is to seize control of Georgia and Armenia, thereby blocking the road to China and even weakening Türkiye because Istanbul was the main beneficiary of this route from China,” he said.

He noted that the French are playing several games at once in the Caucasus. They are currying favour with the Americans, by rendering assistance and to begin to put pressure on Azerbaijan. That is why France is trying so actively to intercept all mediation between Baku and Yerevan, and by seizing all initiatives, try to persuade Azerbaijan to shift towards the West. By achieving this, it will be possible to harm Russia through the North-South direction as well.

The expert noted that the situation in India is bad. For example, it does not want to cooperate with Azerbaijan because it cooperates with Pakistan while Iran, despite warm political and economic relations with Azerbaijan, is determined to protect itself as much as possible and not to promote a specific route.

“Yerevan knows this well and is trying to play on these contradictions and bargain for advantageous positions. However, Armenia does not have sufficient resources for such a large-scale game. It is still considered in the region only as an option for an additional corridor; it can always be bypassed along other routes. Yerevan is playing its game unsuccessfully. It is necessary to understand that the independence of Armenia is essentially guaranteed by just one document - as a member state of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO). Armenia has a very vague future without such a document,” Safarov added.