Azerbaijan and Turkey seek control over Armenia's Syunik, MP claims

Panorama.am editor-in-chief Anahit Voskanyan spoke with Armenian opposition MP Tigran Abrahamyan about the Trump Route project and the real ambitions of Turkey and Azerbaijan.

Panorama: Mr. Abrahamyan, let me begin with a short preface.

Turkey and Azerbaijan constantly promote the idea that once the so-called “Zangezur corridor” opens, Armenia will become a major transit hub. But this narrative doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. If such prosperity truly awaited Armenia, would Turkey and Azerbaijan, two states that hardly act out of goodwill toward Armenia, be so eager to hand it over?

They insist Armenia would join the Middle Corridor, though Georgia already fulfills that role. They claim the project would connect Europe and Asia, yet those connections already exist, with new tariff agreements recently signed between Central Asian countries and Georgia.

They also argue the route would “correct a historic injustice” by linking mainland Azerbaijan with Nakhichevan. But Azerbaijan already maintains an unhindered connection with Nakhichevan through Iran, using established transit routes for both travel and trade.

This leaves aside an even deeper question Azerbaijan avoids: if Nakhichevan was historically part of “one nation” with Azerbaijan, how would Armenia come to lie between and Artsakh and Artsakh? When did Armenia allegedly conquer Azerbaijani lands? In which century?

So here is my actual question: what is it that Turkey and Azerbaijan really want through the Trump Route beyond the propaganda promoted by Pashinyan, Aliyev and Erdogan?

Tigran Abrahamyan: My position is clear. This isn't solely an economic matter, as Azerbaijan already has a direct link to Nakhichevan through Iran. That route fully serves its needs. While economics play a role, the underlying objective is political.

The regional unblocking entails the opening of all transport routes. But in practice, Azerbaijan and Turkey focus only on a narrow stretch through Armenia, designed specifically to ensure Armenia gains as little as possible.

Pashinyan and his allies falsely claimed that a railway would run from Meghri through Nakhichevan, onward to Yeraskh, then to Armavir, Gyumri and finally Kars. Yet just two months ago, Turkey announced the construction of a new railway linking Kars with Nakhichevan via Igdir, bypassing most of Armenia. That line would still connect with the Trump Route at Meghri, but Armenia’s role would be reduced to the absolute minimum. Even economically, Armenia would be marginalized.

But the more critical goal is political. By presenting this as an “economic initiative”, Turkey and Azerbaijan are in fact laying the groundwork for political dominance in Armenia’s Syunik Province. Given the region’s geography, Armenia would struggle to exercise meaningful control over developments there.

We also hear talk of pipelines, energy projects and joint ventures with U.S. companies. Yet all of this remains a vague opportunity.

Claims that Armenia will soon become a crossroads of Europe and Asia sound appealing, but do we have the infrastructure, the legal frameworks or the international guarantees to make that possible? The answer is no.

Through the Washington agreements, Azerbaijan has already secured commitments that align with its strategic interests. By contrast, what Armenia has received is vague, indefinite and lacking real guarantees.