webangah News Agency: The signing of the so-called “Trump Pathway for Peace and International Prosperity” agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan, mediated directly by the United States, is not merely a diplomatic or economic event. Rather, it should be seen as a deliberate intervention in the geopolitical architecture of the South Caucasus. This plan centers on control over one of the region’s most sensitive geographic chokepoints-the Syunik province in Armenia. this corridor enables both Azerbaijan’s land connection to Nakhchivan and Iran’s direct link through Armenia to Georgia and Europe.Any change in this corridor’s legal or managerial status-whether through soft extraterritorial arrangements or transferring operational control to extra-regional actors-would effectively rewrite the regional power balance.
For Iran, the immediate consequence is reduced geostrategic depth in its northwest region. A direct American presence in Syunik brings Western containment efforts closer to Iranian borders and diminishes Tehran’s position from a main route to merely an option option within corridor competition. If this development coincides with solidifying ties between Baku and Ankara, it would establish a cohesive axis stretching from the Caspian Sea to Anatolia capable of structurally challenging Iran’s national interests. In geopolitical network logic, any infrastructural node bypassing Iran becomes a potential leverage point; Zangazur Corridor holds exactly such capacity.
The principal threat lies within governance dimensions. Should Armenia accept “guaranteed access” or “semi-extraterritorial” frameworks under Trump’s blueprint, it would relinquish part of its sovereignty over its most sensitive territory. This would turn Syunik into an instrument for political, economic, and security pressure against Iran. Past experiences show that Western-managed routes-often without official military presence-are accompanied by layered security protocols that can function as geopolitical sensors along Iranian borders.
The implications extend beyond economics alone.Reduced dependence among potential eastern partners-from China to Eurasian Economic Union members-on Iranian transit routes weakens Tehran’s bargaining power. In crisis scenarios, corridors under Western security umbrellas could limit or block flows of goods, energy, and data altogether placing Iran at a strategic disadvantage. Addressing such challenges requires multifaceted policy measures. Direct engagement with Yerevan must stress “Armenia’s full sovereignty over its route” as an inviolable red line embedded within binding executive documents.
together, rapid completion of complementary Iran-Armenia corridors-including upgrading Syunik roads alongside developing Magri-Julfa railway lines-and implementing tariff and customs incentives must ensure that Iranian routes are not just emergency alternatives but lasting preferred choices for Armenia. On-the-ground Iranian involvement through joint investment projects with Russia and China into Syunik infrastructure-as well as enhanced intelligence-monitoring capabilities at border points-is crucial for this strategy.
Executing these policies demands centralized coordination and swift decision-making processes.The Secretariat of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council should act as coordinator by forming a permanent South Caucasus task force involving key ministries alongside security-economic institutions; drafting a national strategic document addressing Zangazur developments; and establishing an early warning system monitoring real-time changes on the ground across Syunik province ensures rapid coordinated responses during sudden shifts.
Ultimately,Zangazur should not be regarded simply as another transit project but rather viewed geopolitically as part of broader efforts seeking to redraw power configurations across the South Caucasus-a process which if met passively by Iran will diminish its strategic depth while curtailing influence over one its most sensitive geopolitical peripheries exceptionally notable for national security interests globally recognized today.
Only through proactive diplomacy combined with tangible on-site engagement plus smart redesigns offering alternative routes can this threat transform into manageable challenges-and perhaps even strategic opportunities.
Hossein Shahpari Trai,
Senior International Affairs Analyst
دیدگاهتان را بنویسید