- Bangladesh Military infrastructure, glamour grows; weaponry expenditure remains limited
- Azerbaijan Azerbaijan-Russia conflict
- Ukraine Bv-206 with Tsar-mangal protection
- Bangladesh India’s defence chief flags China-Pakistan-Bangladesh axis as threat to stability
- DK- Denmark may be on track to buy more F-35 aircraft
Azerbaijan Azerbaijan-Russia conflict
- Thread starter Turan
- Start date
- Messages
- 734
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
political scientist Farhad Mamedov
How Iran will respond to the US in Zangezur
At a press conference in Yerevan, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan confirmed the fact of discussions on transferring control of the Zangezur Corridor to a private company representing a third party.
Although the head of the Armenian government did not specify which state or company he was talking about, it is already known that the Donald Trump administration had previously proposed transferring control over this strategic route to one of the American structures. According to the US Ambassador to Ankara Tom Barrack, who is also President Trump's special envoy for Syria, the American initiative involves establishing external control over a 32-kilometer section of the corridor connecting Azerbaijan with its Nakhchivan enclave with the parallel creation of transport, energy and telecommunications infrastructure.
According to the concept, an investor from a third country will invest in the construction of a railway, highway, pipelines and telecommunications networks, receiving in return a temporary right to operate this infrastructure. And after the investor's investments are fully returned, he is obliged to transfer it to the ownership of the Republic of Armenia. This model, known as Build-Operate-Transfer, is widely used in international practice and, as Pashinyan noted, is fully consistent with the legal field of Armenia.
In parallel, the possibility of transferring border and customs control functions in the corridor to representatives of the same private structure is being discussed, which, in fact, forms not just an economic, but a partially sovereign zone of international governance on Armenian territory. Despite the absence of a final peace agreement between Baku and Yerevan, the Armenian government allows for the conclusion of an interim agreement, and continues consultations on initialing the text of the future peace treaty. As is known, the open involvement of the United States in the process of implementing the Zangezur project is already causing concern among regional powers and, above all, Iran, which has consistently and firmly opposed any format for the functioning of the corridor that could lead to a geopolitical reorganization of the South Caucasus in the interests of Washington. This is why the question of possible actions by the Islamic Republic is becoming increasingly relevant.
Nader Entessari, an emeritus professor at the University of South Alabama and an Iranologist, noted in an interview with the TABNAK news agency that the US strategy in the region is aimed at forming an arc of isolation around Iran. According to him, Washington's key goals boil down to two tasks - strengthening the transport and political blockade of Iran in the direction of the Caucasus and Central Asia, as well as stimulating the political separation of Armenia and Azerbaijan from Russia, which is busy with the war in Ukraine and losing its positions in its former strategic space.
The expert emphasizes that this is not only about geopolitics, but also about economic interests. The South Caucasus is of significant value to the United States in terms of logistics, energy, and alternative supply routes, including bypasses that do not depend on Iranian or Russian territory. And in this context, Entessari believes, the interests of the United States and China may temporarily coincide. Although the strengthening of the American presence objectively undermines the Chinese initiative "One Belt - One Road", it does not threaten its implementation - rather, it forces Beijing to maneuver a little more subtly and prudently. According to the American professor of Iranology, in general, the West is favorably disposed to the initiative on the Zangezur Corridor: the European Union supports any steps that contribute to squeezing Russia out of the post-Soviet space. In addition, Armenia is drifting more and more steadily towards Euro-Atlantic integration every year, while its government, according to the analyst, is not strong enough to effectively resist external pressure from the United States. Turkey, as Entessari believes, is using the situation as an opportunity to expand its geopolitical influence from the South Caucasus to the Caspian Sea and further into Central Asia. In these conditions, Iran risks becoming a marginalized regional actor.
“But even if the Zangezur Corridor does not become a final strategic defeat for Iran, its implementation could cause serious damage to the North-South transport corridor project, promoted jointly by Tehran and Moscow,” Entessari believes. “If a Western-oriented trans-Caucasian route appears, this project, aimed at connecting the Indian Ocean with Europe through Iran, may partially lose its relevance.
At the same time, Entessari notes that Iran's real leverage over the situation is extremely limited. Tehran's political influence on Baku has been reduced to almost zero, and traditional channels of pressure on Yerevan are ineffective today. Iran does not have sufficient military or economic resources to effectively contain a Western offensive on its geopolitical space.
The expert emphasizes that all possible actions by Iran today are the tactics of the "lesser evil." One of the scenarios is to abandon loud statements about "red lines" and focus on targeted projects that are maximally feasible in the current circumstances.
"Previously, Iranian officials have repeatedly stated that the creation of the Zangezur corridor without taking into account Iran's interests is crossing a "red line," Nader Entessari recalled. - But such "red lines" are only important if their crossing is followed by real and tangible consequences. Today, it is not clear that Tehran is ready to take steps consistent with its political rhetoric. I believe that if Iran really intends to protect its interests, now is the critical moment to develop a practical response. Otherwise, the strategic reality of the South Caucasus may be reformatted without taking into account Tehran's national priorities."
How Iran will respond to the US in Zangezur
At a press conference in Yerevan, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan confirmed the fact of discussions on transferring control of the Zangezur Corridor to a private company representing a third party.
Although the head of the Armenian government did not specify which state or company he was talking about, it is already known that the Donald Trump administration had previously proposed transferring control over this strategic route to one of the American structures. According to the US Ambassador to Ankara Tom Barrack, who is also President Trump's special envoy for Syria, the American initiative involves establishing external control over a 32-kilometer section of the corridor connecting Azerbaijan with its Nakhchivan enclave with the parallel creation of transport, energy and telecommunications infrastructure.
According to the concept, an investor from a third country will invest in the construction of a railway, highway, pipelines and telecommunications networks, receiving in return a temporary right to operate this infrastructure. And after the investor's investments are fully returned, he is obliged to transfer it to the ownership of the Republic of Armenia. This model, known as Build-Operate-Transfer, is widely used in international practice and, as Pashinyan noted, is fully consistent with the legal field of Armenia.
In parallel, the possibility of transferring border and customs control functions in the corridor to representatives of the same private structure is being discussed, which, in fact, forms not just an economic, but a partially sovereign zone of international governance on Armenian territory. Despite the absence of a final peace agreement between Baku and Yerevan, the Armenian government allows for the conclusion of an interim agreement, and continues consultations on initialing the text of the future peace treaty. As is known, the open involvement of the United States in the process of implementing the Zangezur project is already causing concern among regional powers and, above all, Iran, which has consistently and firmly opposed any format for the functioning of the corridor that could lead to a geopolitical reorganization of the South Caucasus in the interests of Washington. This is why the question of possible actions by the Islamic Republic is becoming increasingly relevant.
Nader Entessari, an emeritus professor at the University of South Alabama and an Iranologist, noted in an interview with the TABNAK news agency that the US strategy in the region is aimed at forming an arc of isolation around Iran. According to him, Washington's key goals boil down to two tasks - strengthening the transport and political blockade of Iran in the direction of the Caucasus and Central Asia, as well as stimulating the political separation of Armenia and Azerbaijan from Russia, which is busy with the war in Ukraine and losing its positions in its former strategic space.
The expert emphasizes that this is not only about geopolitics, but also about economic interests. The South Caucasus is of significant value to the United States in terms of logistics, energy, and alternative supply routes, including bypasses that do not depend on Iranian or Russian territory. And in this context, Entessari believes, the interests of the United States and China may temporarily coincide. Although the strengthening of the American presence objectively undermines the Chinese initiative "One Belt - One Road", it does not threaten its implementation - rather, it forces Beijing to maneuver a little more subtly and prudently. According to the American professor of Iranology, in general, the West is favorably disposed to the initiative on the Zangezur Corridor: the European Union supports any steps that contribute to squeezing Russia out of the post-Soviet space. In addition, Armenia is drifting more and more steadily towards Euro-Atlantic integration every year, while its government, according to the analyst, is not strong enough to effectively resist external pressure from the United States. Turkey, as Entessari believes, is using the situation as an opportunity to expand its geopolitical influence from the South Caucasus to the Caspian Sea and further into Central Asia. In these conditions, Iran risks becoming a marginalized regional actor.
“But even if the Zangezur Corridor does not become a final strategic defeat for Iran, its implementation could cause serious damage to the North-South transport corridor project, promoted jointly by Tehran and Moscow,” Entessari believes. “If a Western-oriented trans-Caucasian route appears, this project, aimed at connecting the Indian Ocean with Europe through Iran, may partially lose its relevance.
At the same time, Entessari notes that Iran's real leverage over the situation is extremely limited. Tehran's political influence on Baku has been reduced to almost zero, and traditional channels of pressure on Yerevan are ineffective today. Iran does not have sufficient military or economic resources to effectively contain a Western offensive on its geopolitical space.
The expert emphasizes that all possible actions by Iran today are the tactics of the "lesser evil." One of the scenarios is to abandon loud statements about "red lines" and focus on targeted projects that are maximally feasible in the current circumstances.
"Previously, Iranian officials have repeatedly stated that the creation of the Zangezur corridor without taking into account Iran's interests is crossing a "red line," Nader Entessari recalled. - But such "red lines" are only important if their crossing is followed by real and tangible consequences. Today, it is not clear that Tehran is ready to take steps consistent with its political rhetoric. I believe that if Iran really intends to protect its interests, now is the critical moment to develop a practical response. Otherwise, the strategic reality of the South Caucasus may be reformatted without taking into account Tehran's national priorities."
