Over the past thirty years, the South Caucasus has been a strategic geography situated at the center of both regional and global power struggles. The Second Karabakh War and subsequent developments, the competition over energy and transportation corridors, the contest for influence among major powers, and the security concerns of regional actors have rendered this geography one of the enduring elements of instability.
Azerbaijan’s just cause, grounded in international law and historical legitimacy, together with the conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia, has directly affected not only the political relations of the two countries, but also the strategic calculations of extra-regional actors such as China, Russia, Iran, the European Union (EU), and the United States (US). Therefore, every peace initiative in the region constitutes a critical development with not only local, but also multilayered and global ramifications.
The Azerbaijan–Armenia “joint peace declaration” signed in Washington on 8 August 2025, unlike the limited and fragile ceasefires of the past, holds the potential to establish a structural and multidimensional order. The summit personally hosted by US President Donald Trump is interpreted not merely as a diplomatic table achievement, but also as a long-term strategic move that will redefine the balance of power in the South Caucasus.
The documents signed at the summit aim for comprehensive cooperation in areas such as energy, transportation, trade, and technology, while also clearly revealing Washington’s intent to establish a purportedly permanent security and infrastructure architecture in the region. In this context, the scope and implications of the agreement should be examined carefully not only in terms of bilateral relations between the two countries, but also within the framework of global power competition.
1. Washington Summit: Diplomatic Framework and Significance
The trilateral summit held at the White House witnessed an agreement that could reshape the political map of the South Caucasus. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, under the auspices of US. President Donald Trump, signed a “joint peace declaration.” This document has been regarded not merely as a post-war arrangement, but also as the foundation of a new vision for regional integration along the axes of energy, transportation, technology, and trade. The bilateral economic agreements simultaneously signed by the parties with the US have symbolized Washington’s intention to invest in the region.[i]
Statements made by the Co-Chairs of the US Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus, Steve Cohen and Robert Aderholt, have clearly revealed the significance of this process within American politics. Cohen recalled Azerbaijan’s long-standing strategic relations with the US, while Aderholt emphasized Trump’s leadership and the role of Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.[ii] In this context, the agreement has been perceived not only as a development between the two countries, but also as a gain in terms of the US’ diplomatic prestige in the region. The American side has positioned this peace process among the concrete success stories of its diplomatic history.
The diplomatic significance of this development is not limited to conflict resolution alone. Washington’s assumption of a direct guarantor role has relegated Russia’s traditional mediating position in the region to the background. The US’ proposal of permanent mechanisms in both political and economic spheres to institutionalize peace could fundamentally alter the balance of power in the South Caucasus. For Moscow, this represents a loss of strategic influence, whereas for Baku, it has provided an opportunity to build a more balanced relationship with the West.
At the White House ceremony on August 9, Trump voiced a “mutual return and exchange” formula regarding the Ukraine–Russia War.[iii] This approach demonstrates the US’ prioritization of reconciling parties in global crises through limited concessions. The same pattern appears to have been reflected in the Azerbaijan–Armenia agreement. This method reveals that the US employs similar diplomatic templates in simultaneous crisis management across different regions.
Following the summit, President Aliyev stressed that no time should be wasted in converting the initialed peace text into an official signature.[iv] His description of the occasion as a “historic day” indicates that he perceives the agreement not merely as the closure of past conflicts, but as a turning point opening the door to future regional projects. This discourse underscores Azerbaijan’s view of peace not as a static final state, but as the beginning of new diplomatic and economic initiatives.
2. Zangezur–TRIPP Agreement: Geostrategic Calculations and Regional Impact
The most strategic outcome of the summit was the redesign of the Zangezur Corridor. Trump announced that Armenia had initiated an exclusive partnership with the US for the development of this route, and that the agreement could last for 99 years, with Yerevan already pledging to renew it at the end of that period. The renaming of the corridor as the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP)” demonstrated that the project had acquired not only a diplomatic but also a symbolic dimension.[v] It was stated that the route in question would be constructed in a manner that would provide Azerbaijan with direct land access to Nakhchivan while preserving Armenia’s sovereign rights.
For Azerbaijan, TRIPP signifies the realization of the long-sought Nakhchivan connection. This route, which will link Nakhchivan –bordering Türkiye– with the Azerbaijani mainland, will enable Ankara to establish direct transportation to the Turkic Republics of Central Asia. Although the initial plan envisioned a land connection, current geopolitical dynamics suggest that the project will likely proceed through the Caspian Basin rather than overland. This strategic route, which emerged on the agenda after the Second Karabakh War, had been postponed due to Armenia’s security concerns. US mediation and guarantee have broken this political resistance, making the project feasible.[vi] Consequently, this development is expected to strengthen the Ankara–Baku transportation axis and create a lasting backbone for Central Asian logistics.
From Washington’s perspective, TRIPP represents an infrastructure and security partnership in the South Caucasus that could extend up to 99 years. Through this route, the US will secure trade corridors and diversify regional energy routes. Cutting off Iran’s direct northward link via Armenia will limit Tehran’s maneuverability while creating a strategic advantage for Azerbaijan’s ally, Israel. This scenario also increases the likelihood of a US military base being established in Armenia in the future.
The relationship between TRIPP and the Middle Corridor, which operates via Georgia, demonstrates that the region’s transportation strategy is evolving into a dual-route structure. While the Middle Corridor –without bypassing Georgia– continues to serve as the main west–east connection for Türkiye and Azerbaijan, the US-controlled TRIPP is entering as a complementary and strategic alternative route. In fact, this route, to be opened through Nakhchivan, was originally discussed in the context of the Zangezur Corridor as a means of shortening the Middle Corridor by routing it through Nakhchivan–Zangezur. However, in the current situation, the route has fallen under US monopoly and will be operated under US control, removing it from the scope of the Middle Corridor and transforming it entirely into an element of US–China rivalry. This structure not only limits Russia’s capacity for influence in the region but also constitutes a direct move against China. Thus, TRIPP strengthens the goal of establishing a Western-centered logistics network as an alternative to the Belt and Road Initiative, transforming it into a critical component of not only regional but also global power competition.
3. The Declaration’s Legal Framework, Diplomatic Dimension and Multidimensional Partnership
The official text released by the Armenian Prime Minister’s Office clearly sets out the framework of the seven-article declaration. The first provisions envisage the swift completion of the signing and ratification process of the “Treaty on the Establishment of Peace and the Creation of Interstate Relations.” The joint application for the formal closure of the OSCE Minsk Process and all related structures signifies the termination of Russia’s mediation channel and the complete transfer of the process to US mediation.[vii]
The third and fourth provisions define both the technical and political dimensions of TRIPP. Azerbaijan will gain uninterrupted land access to Nakhchivan, while Armenia will achieve broader integration into international trade routes.[viii] The project, to be implemented with the support of the US and designated third parties, aims to build security through mutual interdependence. This approach serves not only as a means of transportation but also as an important instrument for the long-term construction of economic and political stability.
The final provisions reaffirm the principles of the inviolability of borders and the rejection of territorial acquisition by force, with explicit reference to the UN Charter and the 1991 Almaty Declaration. The rejection of revanchist approaches demonstrates the will to prevent potential future conflicts.
The additional memoranda signed by Pashinyan and Trump cover capacity expansion for the “Peace Junction” project, technology partnerships in the fields of artificial intelligence and semiconductors, and strategic cooperation in energy security.[ix] This diversity shows that the agreement has been elevated from a purely security-oriented framework to a multidimensional strategic partnership. In this way, the peace process gains the opportunity to institutionalize itself not only through transportation and trade but also through technology and energy.
4. TRIPP and the Potential Medium to Long-Term Strategic Implications of the US Presence
The US’ aspiration for a lasting presence in the South Caucasus, together with the TRIPP route, holds the potential to directly influence the foreign policy priorities and domestic political balances of Azerbaijan and Armenia in the coming years. For Azerbaijan, this project is not merely a transportation line that permanently secures the Nakhchivan connection, but also a security guarantee that expands its strategic room for maneuver in relations with the West. However, such rapprochement may bring new points of tension in relations with Russia and Iran.
As Moscow increasingly perceives itself excluded from peace processes shaped under its own initiative, it may resort to pressure tools targeting Azerbaijan’s energy and trade routes. Tehran, for its part, could define the potential presence of US military forces along its northern border as a security threat and employ its proxy elements in the region more actively. Nevertheless, under Washington’s guarantee, Azerbaijan is expected to be able to mobilize its capacity for international support more rapidly in the face of such pressures.
On the Armenian side, US guarantees will, in the short term, enhance military deterrence against Azerbaijan and accelerate the process of integration with the West. In the longer term, however, Washington’s influence in economic, security, and technological spheres could become a factor constraining Yerevan’s foreign policy autonomy. The 99-year structure of the TRIPP project would transform Armenia into a Western-oriented logistics and energy hub in regional projects, while simultaneously heightening tensions in its relations with Russia. Moscow’s perception of this development as a strategic loss could lead to increased retaliatory pressure on Armenia in economic and security domains. Thus, the infrastructure and purported security architecture established by the US in the region, while delivering short-term gains to the parties, may in the long run confront both countries with new diplomatic challenges amid an intensifying multipolar competition.
Taken together, these developments indicate that the Washington-led peace process and the TRIPP route mark the beginning of a period likely to produce long-lasting effects on the geopolitical equation of the South Caucasus. While the agreement provides Azerbaijan and Armenia with strategic gains in the short term, it could, in the medium to long term, place the parties at the center of new power struggles, creating a complex environment for security and diplomacy. The US’ enduring presence in the region will trigger countermeasures from actors such as Russia and Iran, thereby intensifying multipolar competition. This, in turn, could generate fragile balances in transportation, energy, and security. Consequently, the economic opportunities and political stability promised by TRIPP can only be transformed into lasting success if regional actors manage this new order in a manner aligned with their national interests; otherwise, today’s peace architecture may evolve into the stage for a more complex and risky power struggle in the future.
[i] “President Trump Brokers Another Historic Peace Deal”, The White House, https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/08/president-trump-brokers-another-historic-peace-deal, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
[ii] “Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus Co-Chairs Cohen and Aderholt Release Statements on Peace Deal between Azerbaijan and Armenia”, Congressman Steve Cohen, https://cohen.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressional-azerbaijan-caucus-co-chairs-cohen-and-aderholt-release, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
[iii] “Tramp: Zelenskiy Dolzhen Byt Gotov Chto-to Podpisat”, TASS, https://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/24743415, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
[iv] “Aliyev: Podpisaniye Mirnogo Soglasheniya s Armeniyey ne Dolzhno Zatyanutsya”, TASS, https://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/24743165, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
[v] “Tramp: Armeniya Mozhet Prodlit Soglasheniye s SSHA na 99 let”, Vesti, https://www.vesti.ru/article/4634524, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
[vi] Nik Popli, “Trump Celebrates ‘Peace Deal’ With Azerbaijan and Armenia That Gives U.S. Access to Key Transit Route”, Time, https://time.com/7308564/trump-peace-deal-armenia-azerbaijan, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
[vii] “Joint Declaration by the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia and the President of the United States of America on the outcomes of their meeting in Washington D.C., United States of America”, The Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia, https://www.primeminister.am/en/press-release/item/2025/08/09/Nikol-Pashinyan-visit-US-declaration, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
[viii] “Sovmestnaya Deklaratsiya Azerbaydzhana i Armenii sostoit iz Semi Punktov”, TASS, https://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/24742887, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
[ix] “Pashinyan Podpisal s Trampom tri Dokumenta ob Uglublenii Partnerstva Armenii i SSHA”, Vesti, https://www.vesti.ru/article/4634605, (Access Date: 09.08.2025).
