Pundits view foreign policy actors behind Yerevan’s intractable stance on Zangezur Corridor Expert opinions on Caliber.Az

The Zangezur Corridor project (through the territory of Armenia) has lost its attractiveness for us. Hikmat Hajiyev, assistant to the Azerbaijani president and head of the foreign policy department under the Presidential Administration, has told Politico. In the opinion of Hajiyev, Baku is working on a similar project with Tehran - a transport route through Iranian territory to Nakhchivan and further to Türkiye. At the same time, Hajiyev said that Baku is not writing off the Zangezur Corridor, which can provide the same transport route, but through Armenia.

“If this is the case, yes, but if not then OK. It’s still on the table but it will require from the Armenian side to show they’re really interested in that,” POLITICO quotes Hajiyev as saying.

Azerbaijan does not plan to capture Zangezur, POLITICO quotes Hajiyev.

“Our agenda was only about building transport linkages and connectivity through the framework of bilateral engagement,” said Hajiyev.

Earlier this month, as part of an agreement with Iran, Azerbaijan began construction of a new road through the neighboring country. However, there is hope that transport links between Armenia and Azerbaijan can also be restored.

As Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexey Overchuk said the other day, Armenia has not yet formed a final position regarding the road planned through Meghri.

Naturally, the question arises: why does Armenia continue to be stubborn in implementing this seemingly beneficial project in all respects? There is still no clearly expressed readiness of Yerevan to begin discussions with Baku on the practical restoration of a railway line and a road along the Araz River on the territory of Armenia.

Renowned foreign experts shared their thoughts on this issue with Caliber.Az.

Political analyst Kazbek Beysebayev (Kazakhstan) recalled the existence of a version that the Zangezur Corridor can restore broken ties throughout the Turkic world and, specifically through Azerbaijan, between Türkiye and the countries of Central Asia.

“Iran is allegedly against this project, which is precisely hindering the integration processes of the Turkic states. However, Tehran, on the contrary, offers its territory for Azerbaijan to exit through Iran to Türkiye. Transit is not free, and there are great benefits for the transit country. We know this from the example of other countries through which large transport corridors pass. As we see, Iran acts in relation to transit through its territory based on its economic and political interests. There is both business and politics here,” says Beysebayev.

It would seem that Armenia also needs to take advantage of its geographical position, he noted.

“It is obvious that the Zangezur corridor would provide stable income to the Armenian budget. Let's face it, the greater the cargo flow, the more money would go to the treasury. But, apparently, Yerevan does not want this profitable project. What's the matter? In my opinion, behind Yerevan’s position are other foreign actors who do not benefit from the Zangezur corridor project. These are the United States and leading European nations that fear the growing influence of Türkiye and Iran in the Eurasian region. It is no coincidence that we are seeing the leadership of Armenia begin to turn away from Russia and focus more on the West,” the Kazakh analyst believes.

Executive Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies (Kyiv) Igor Semivolos believes that an alternative route project between the western regions of Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan through Iran is quite possible, but, given the complex relations between Baku and Tehran, it does not seem quintessential.

“The best route, of course, runs through Zangezur or, in the Armenian interpretation, Syunik. Previously, the main obstacle was the requirement for the extraterritoriality of this route, similar to the Lachin ‘corridor’,” but now, after the restoration of Azerbaijan’s full sovereignty over the entire territory of Karabakh, this issue is no longer relevant,” says the pundit.

In theory, this route is beneficial for Armenia, given the benefits it can receive, he underscores.

“But the problem is that without concluding a peace agreement with Azerbaijan, resuming diplomatic relations with Türkiye and finding its new place in the security system in the South Caucasus, Yerevan will not agree to this. Therefore, an integrated approach is required here, where the security factor, financial and other guarantees of Armenia must be taken into account, which will encourage the Pashinyan government to make a positive decision. In my opinion, there are no such guarantees now,” Semivolos concluded.