Iran sees major security risks in TRIPP project, analyst says

The Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP) poses serious security challenges to Iran and is viewed in Tehran as far more than an economic project, an Iran-based Armenian analyst claims

Speaking at a forum titled “South Caucasus: Reconfiguration of Forces,” organized by the Alternative Projects Group on Wednesday, Aram Shahnazaryan, the editor of the Alik daily published in Iran, said Iranian officials have expressed clear reservations despite diplomatic reassurances from Armenia.

“In diplomatic language, taking into account all the nuances, it was stated that Armenia has assured that all of Iran’s interests, observations and reservations will be considered, and that the project will pose no threat,” Shahnazaryan said. “Immediately after such statements, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson said, ‘but.’”

Shahnazaryan said that within Iran’s state institutions there are unequivocal concerns about the initiative, and that in the country’s analytical and expert circles, these reservations are being voiced openly.

He argued that TRIPP is being touted by Armenia’s current authorities as an economic and unblocking project aimed at improving regional connectivity. However, many Iranian experts consider its economic benefits secondary.

“The main issue that the West and the United States are trying to address through TRIPP is a shift in the regional security environment and the geopolitical balance of power,” Shahnazaryan said. “For Iran, this carries, first and foremost, very serious security challenges.”

According to him, Tehran considers any Western military or security presence along its immediate border unacceptable. He warned that the project could reduce Iran’s role as a key transit route and diminish its influence in regional security processes.

Shahnazaryan also addressed concerns about the possible involvement of security forces from NATO member states in safeguarding the corridor. He stated such a development would amount to “direct American, NATO and Western presence on Iran’s immediate border”, an area where, since 1991, Tehran has faced “virtually zero problems.”

He added that some in Iran fear the project could also open the door to an Israeli presence in Armenia.

Despite these concerns, Shahnazaryan said Iran is unlikely to mount a harsh response to the initiative. Instead, he suggested Tehran could counterbalance it by accelerating and operationalizing its own North–South project.