The so-called “Zangezur Corridor” has emerged as one of the most critical geostrategic hubs in the South Caucasus region. Although it is officially presented as an infrastructure project aimed at facilitating transit trade between Azerbaijan and Turkey, in reality, behind this seemingly economic venture lies a multi-layered geopolitics strategy which is mainly intended for Iran.
Iran sees the project not simply as a commercial initiative, but as a concerted effort to isolate it, involving Turkey, Azerbaijan, NATO forces, and behind the scenes, Israel. This raises questions about whether the Zangezur Corridor can be considered a “soft power” tool or a geopolitical weapon to reshape the regional map.
The name “Zangezur” is not accidental. It comes from a historical region of Russia αThe principality, created in 1868, has been a bone of contention between Armenia and Azerbaijan for decades. After the fall of the Soviet Union, claims over this region intensified, particularly against the backdrop of the conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh.
The proposed corridor will pass through the Armenian province of Syunik, a critical enclave between Iran, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. Its implementation will have direct implications for Armenia's territorial integrity, as well as Iran's geopolitical influence in the South Caucasus.
Η economic importance is not as important as the geostrategic importance of Zangezur. The geographical importance of the area cannot be underestimated. Iran's only direct land connection with Armenia, approximately 44 kilometers long, is in danger of being severed if the corridor is completed in the proposed form.
This will αisolatede of Iran from its northern corridor to the Caucasus and Europe, will youreduction of Iran's strategic role as an energy and trade transit hub, and willξήσe for geostrategic influence of Turkey and Azerbaijan, with the support of external forces.
The role of Turkey and Azerbaijan is critical to the new corridor. Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev is one of the most ardent supporters of the construction of the corridor, which he presents as a national restoration of Azerbaijan's connectivity with the Nakhchivan enclave and Turkey. Turkey, in turn, sees the project as a strategic opening to Central Asia, as it directly connects Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan.
The Turkey-Azerbaijan alliance is based on their shared cultural and ethnic identity (“one language, one nation”) and is reinforced by military exercises, energy deals and technological cooperation. British investors and Israeli security companies have also expressed strong interest, presenting the project as an opportunity for security and economic development.
Iran It is recipient of geopolitical pressure. Iran considers the Zangezur Corridor a “Zionist plan” of destabilization, which aims to σcutting off his access to Armenia and through it to Europe, pthe undermining of its influence in the Caucasus and the isolation of from Russia, and inthe provoking of ethnic instability through the resurgence of separatist movements in northwestern Iran (Iranian Azerbaijan).
Iran also fears that this project could be a lever for military pressure from NATO forces, through Turkey and Azerbaijan, which have strengthened their military cooperation in recent years.
NATO, although it does not officially appear as sponsor of the corridor, benefits strategically from its completion. A more “open” Azerbaijan, strengthened with infrastructure and support from Turkey, can serve as an outpost of Western influence in the wider Caucasus region.
Furthermore, weakening Iranian influence favors the geopolitical interests of the West, primarily the US and Israel, at a time when containing Iran is considered a top priority, both for security reasons and to contain Russia and China.
However, you should not overlook the risk of destabilizationcombining luxury accommodations with the potential for significant expansion. imposing such a corridor without the consent of Armenia and Iran may lead to αincreasing tensions at the borders, aignition of ethnic movements in Iran and southern Armenia, pgreater militarization of the region, with the participation of third parties and aa rearrangement of alliances, with possible further convergence of Iran-Russia-China in an anti-NATO direction.
Russia is in a big dilemma. Russia, with traditional influence in the Caucasus, maintains a military presence in Armenia and has an interest in preventing the expansion of Turkish and Western influence in the region. However, Moscow, weakened by the war in Ukraine, does not have the same determination to intervene as in the past.
At the same time, Armenia's ambivalence about turning to the West has left Russia in an uncertain position, while Azerbaijan's moves appear to serve the competitive strategies of Ankara and NATO.
The Zangezur Corridor, although presented as an infrastructure project for economic prosperity, is in essence a geopolitical project of profound strategic importance. Its completion threatens to cause radical upheavals in the wider region, aweakening Iran and limiting its presence in the Caucasus, εstrengthening Turkey as a major transit hub between Europe and Asia and apaving the way for NATO penetration into Iran's northwestern borders.
The question is whether this corridor will act as a bridge of cooperation or a trigger for destabilization. Iran, regional powers, and the international community must carefully weigh the cost of an option that may bring more conflict than connectivity.
Our country is in a state of inactivity and, with a lack of broader strategic planning for new trade corridors and geo-economic and geopolitical upheavals, is in danger of losing the end of the Indian Silk Road (IMEC) in Piraeus by Italian competitors.
Picture
Mapeh - Own work. Based on the following documents: Artsakh Republic 1994-2020.svg by Nicolay Sidorov
(CC-BY-SA-4.0). QarabaghWarMap(2020).svg by Emreculha (CC-BY-SA-4.0).
The map here: https://twitter.com/abel_riu/status/1326158071320768512. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
