Georgia senses the Zangezur Corridor’s rise and grows uneasy

In recent weeks, the transit route through Georgia—long familiar and reliable for Azerbaijani citizens—has begun to experience serious disruptions. What at first seemed like random mishaps gradually formed a pattern that had nothing in common with the previously predictable system. Azerbaijani long-haul drivers, who have worked this route for decades, suddenly found themselves in an environment where order gave way to chaos, politeness to rudeness, and the law to arbitrary decisions.

The first delays faced by Azerbaijani trucks appeared to be minor technical issues. However, within days it became clear that the situation went far beyond routine bureaucratic complications. Drivers were being stopped without clear reasons, document processing times stretched into weeks, and attempts to seek explanations were met with irritation, evasive responses, and circumstances in which decisions depended not on regulations but on the mood of individual Georgian customs officers. Drivers also reported cases where they were “hinted” at the possibility of speeding up the process—effectively being asked for informal payments—which further exposed the true nature of what was happening.

For those who spent weeks “living” in the cabins of their trucks on Georgian territory, it became obvious that the familiar logic of the route was collapsing. Some vehicles were let through immediately. Others were delayed without explanation. Still others were turned back without any protocol or official paperwork.

It was precisely the sequence of such episodes that became the clearest confirmation that this was not an accidental disruption, but a mechanism that at some point began operating according to its own rules.

Azerbaijani truck drivers complain that they face rudeness from Georgian customs officers and that the processing of necessary documentation is being deliberately delayed. In a report by Azerbaijan Television, one driver — Parvin Hasanov — said that he had been stuck at the customs office in Tbilisi for as long as 21 days.

“My documents are all in order. There is no reason for me to be held up for so many days. Yet the customs officers are rude to us. Besides the customs staff, the road police also create major problems for us,” Hasanov said.

Another truck driver, Nizamaddin Rzayev, said he had been “kept in limbo” in Tbilisi for 20 days, with no explanation. When he asks about the reason for the delay, he is met with rudeness and hostility from the Georgian customs officers and police.

The situation inevitably led to a pressing question. If such incidents were happening repeatedly, then there had to be a reason behind them — one that went far beyond ordinary organisational disorder. At first, individual trucks were delayed. Then groups of them. Later, entire convoys. Drivers could not move and could not understand why a familiar route had suddenly turned into a zone of uncertainty, an obstacle course impossible to navigate. There were no official explanations — not even coherent informal ones. Only hints, smirks, and remarks laced with irritation. Azerbaijani drivers were told: “Go through Zangezur. When your Zangezur Corridor is ready.” These words sounded less like a joke and more like thinly veiled annoyance.

This is where the first — and likely the main — reason becomes visible. Tbilisi can clearly see that the logistical reality of the region is changing, and that the Zangezur route is no longer discussed as a distant prospect. It is actually being built, becoming part of a new infrastructure that will eventually shift the established balance. Against the backdrop of Georgia’s decades-long monopoly in regional logistics, even the possibility of an alternative route is perceived in Tbilisi as a painful development. Paradoxically, the Zangezur route could strengthen the economies of all countries in the region, including Georgia itself. It expands the network — it does not replace it. But such logic does not work at every level, and where calculations should prevail, emotional jealousy sometimes takes over. This factor becomes especially noticeable when Georgian officials tell drivers to “go through Zangezur,” ask when it will open, and do so in a tone that is far from a neutral professional exchange.

There is, apparently, another layer of reasons. Georgia has always had figures connected to the Armenian environment — by origin, biography, or political sympathies. They do not determine the country’s overall strategic course, but they are present in the system visibly enough for their attitude toward Azerbaijan to manifest itself in sensitive areas such as this one. Especially now, when processes taking place in Armenia itself are displeasing to certain Armenian circles abroad. For them, a strengthening Azerbaijan is an unwelcome reality, and any development that falls outside familiar stereotypes provokes irritation. Within the Georgian bureaucracy, such sentiments may not take the form of direct decisions, but rather of conditions created under the guise of technical procedures.

There is also a third motive increasingly discussed by experts. In recent years, Georgia’s relations with its northern neighbour have evolved in such a way that the latter’s influence could surface in certain practical decisions. Within analytical circles, there is a view that irritation was caused by the very fact that the agreements on the Zangezur Corridor were reached in Washington — and that the project is moving forward without the involvement of those who have long considered such processes their sphere of control. Against this backdrop, it is suggested that certain groups oriented toward the interests of that northern country may have used any convenient pretext to create conditions that complicate the movement of Azerbaijani drivers through Georgia. This is not a claim nor a definitive conclusion, but it is a possibility increasingly mentioned by experts who closely follow regional dynamics. In the current political configuration, even a faint hint of such influence no longer seems abstract.

Against the backdrop of all these developments, Azerbaijan’s stance has remained calm and consistent. For many years, Georgia has been viewed — and continues to be viewed — by the country as a partner with whom Baku has built relations based on trust, mutual support, and openness. Azerbaijan has never refused Georgia assistance, including during periods when the situation in the country was particularly difficult. This is why the current situation involving Azerbaijani truck drivers understandably causes bewilderment in the Azerbaijani society. From a country that benefits from stable cooperation, one would expect at least a minimal degree of respect for the rights of Azerbaijani citizens who are simply doing their jobs and ensuring trade flows that benefit not only Azerbaijan but Georgia itself.

Azerbaijan’s position remains unchanged. Azerbaijan remembers both acts of goodwill and cases of injustice. Injustice against Azerbaijan or its citizens never goes unanswered — this has been demonstrated repeatedly across different periods, whether in the tragedy involving the AZAL aircraft, the killings of Azerbaijanis in Yekaterinburg, or decisions taken by the Biden administration that Baku reasonably considered unfair. In all these (and many other) cases, Azerbaijan’s response was consistent and unequivocal.

Against this backdrop, the creation of artificial obstacles for Azerbaijani truck drivers cannot be regarded as an isolated episode. The region is entering a phase in which old transit habits can no longer be taken for granted, and the Zangezur route is turning from a political discussion into emerging infrastructure. Georgia’s long-standing transit monopoly is no longer unquestionable. Azerbaijan is strengthening its role as a military and economic centre of the South Caucasus. Any actions that undermine confidence in the Georgian route harm Georgia itself first and foremost — a country that for many years relied on transit as a strategic advantage. Azerbaijan, meanwhile, makes it clear that the dignity of its citizens and the protection of their rights are not subjects for compromise.

At such moments, another factor must also be taken into account. Georgia is home to a large Azerbaijani community for whom relations between the two countries are not an abstract matter of diplomacy but part of their daily reality. Any sign of injustice or disrespect is felt particularly sharply by this community. For Baku, sensitivity to these feelings has always been an important guiding principle — and this approach remains unchanged. Azerbaijan has never left its citizens or compatriots without support, regardless of where they live. This is neither a warning nor a hint. It is part of the political reality that all those involved will have to take into consideration.