Beniamin Matevosyan: The “Zangezur corridor” is coming back

(Aliyev demolished the central thesis of Pashinyan’s propaganda)

The latest statement by President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan at the Shusha Global Media Forum dealt a powerful blow to the domestic political narrative of Armenia’s leadership. For a long time, official Yerevan had built a rigid information line, convincing the public that the threat of an extraterritorial corridor had been eliminated once and for all. Nikol Pashinyan’s team positioned the “Crossroads of Peace” project as the sole legitimate alternative to externally imposed transport formats, that would guarantee Armenia’s full sovereignty and jurisdiction over all future roads. It was claimed that the “corridor” issue, in its original form dangerous to territorial integrity, had been completely removed from the international agenda. However, Baku’s rhetoric has shown that a change of signage did not change the geopolitical essence of the process.

The main trigger for a new wave of discussion was Aliyev’s remarks about the role of Washington, and personally Donald Trump, in shaping the final peace agreements. The Azerbaijani leader openly displayed terminological stubbornness, effectively equating the TRIPP project (Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity), signed at the White House in August 2025, with his original demand for the creation of the so-called “Zangezur corridor.” For Baku, the appearance of an American operator was not a concession to Yerevan, quite the opposite, it was recognition of the importance of the transport route linking the main part of Azerbaijan with Nakhchivan. Aliyev directly stressed that the US administration had taken Baku’s concerns into account and had “explained to Armenia” that this project was necessary.

This interpretation of events exposes a deep crisis in Armenia’s official propaganda. For the domestic audience in Armenia, this statement becomes a serious irritant, since it openly points to the external pressure under which Yerevan signed the Washington agreements. Instead of the sovereign and voluntary “Crossroads of Peace” that Armenian authorities had proclaimed, Baku is presenting what happened as its own geopolitical triumph, achieved with the support of the world’s leading power. The fact that Aliyev praises the Trump administration for creating the framework for peace underscores that Azerbaijan managed to incorporate its strategic goals into the American regional agenda.

Of particular significance in this analytical construction is the question of sovereignty, which the two sides interpret in diametrically opposite ways. Formally, under the terms of the agreements, the section of communications running through the territory of the Syunik region remains under Armenia’s sovereignty and within its legal jurisdiction.

However, transferring management and development rights over this territory to an American consortium for a term of 99 years changes the real balance of power. Baku interprets this as an outright victory: if Armenia itself does not physically control this route, and its security and operation are ensured by an international (in this case, American) operator, then the concept of a “corridor” bypassing Yerevan’s direct control is effectively functioning.

As a result, the international TRIPP project, which was presented to Armenian society as a compromise and a guarantee of stability, remains, in Azerbaijan’s portrayal, the very same “Zangezur corridor.” Aliyev’s demonstrative refusal to use the new terminology, along with his emphasis on the fact that Yerevan was forced to accept these terms, undermines trust in the Armenian government’s statements. Baku is making it clear that what matters to it is not the operator’s legal status, but the end result — a guaranteed connection to Nakhchivan, independent of Yerevan’s will, which cements new geopolitical realities in the region that do not favor Armenia.

Think about that…