Trump’s self-branded “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” may be closer to the proverbial road to hell that is paved with good intentions, and it will not be solid grounds for him to be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize.
This deal, if you really want to call it that, could be the very spark for a wider regional shooting war—and not only involving these two stakeholders.
It has been with much fanfare and self-backslapping that Donald Trump announced the much touted deal between mortal at the White House on 8th August 2025.
As part of the purported peace deal, at which both Azeri President Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan attended, both leaders agreed that neither had any claim on the other’s territory, and that they would refrain from use of military force to solve disputes, which, given the case of Artsakh/Nagorny Karabakh, is effectively an unconditional surrender for Armenia.
Anything but peace this will likley acheive but rather
Trump, of course, proceeded to open the mouth as we have come to expect, saying:
“For more than 35 years, Armenia and Azerbaijan have fought a bitter conflict that resulted in tremendous suffering for both nations, they suffered gravely for so many years. Many tried to find a resolution, including the European Union. The Russians worked very hard on. It never happened.”
While a social media post by the US president the evening before was even more self-congratulatory, starting with:
“I look forward to hosting the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, and the Prime Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, at the White House tomorrow for a Historic Peace Summit. These two Nations have been at War for many years, resulting in the deaths of thousands of people. Many Leaders have tried to end the War, with no success, until now, thanks to TRUMP.”
Trump’s bizarre claim that this will improve both countries’ economies seems far-fetched, as the enclave is of little economic importance.
Looking at the map, I am almost certain that economics has nothing to do with the corridor, and that its moniker is rather the opposite of what it is intended for. So the US is to get a 99-year lease over the strategic Zagezur Corridor, and it will be guarded by “military contractors” and this just happens to be on Iran’s doorstep.
Under the deal, the motivation is clear, to block Russian-Iranian and Chinese collaboration, and this is why the Armenians will “lease” the corridor to the US for such a long period, and in retrospect, in other deals, this is forever. This strategic territory on the north-western border of Iran will be supposedly used for economic activities, but the presence of US mercenaries, means that it is a direct threat to Iran, who have, not surprisingly, reacted angrily, with Akbar Velayati, top adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, warning:
“This corridor will not become a passage owned by Trump, but rather a graveyard for Trump’s mercenaries,”
Western pundits insist Iran “lacks the strength” to block the corridor—but these are the same voices who claimed Ukraine was winning for three years and that Israel “defeated” Iran before begging Washington for a ceasefire under missile fire.
The corridor’s real purpose is clear: cut the Russia-Iran-China transit route through the Caucasus and position U.S. contractors and Israeli operatives within striking distance of Iran. Turkey’s supposed gain—direct access to Central Asia—is unlikely, since Washington won’t let its allies grow too strong.
Turkey’s military reputation is also overstated. Its Western tanks have fared poorly against Russian ATGMs in Syria and Iraq, and it would fare worse against Iran, which has advanced drones and better-trained forces.
The recent threat by Aliyev to lift a moratorium on supplying weapons to Ukraine will certainly not have made him any more popular in Russia, and his belief in western support is delusional in light of the rapidly unfolding disaster in Ukraine, as 3 years of conflict are now bearing fruit for the armed forces of the Russian Federation.
Tribes and Bribes
As for Azerbaijan, it risks a two-front conflict with both Russia and Iran, neither of whom tolerates Aliyev’s pro-Ukrainian, pro-Israeli tilt. No surprise here: despite democratic trappings, Azerbaijan is a dictatorship. This comes with inevitable strings attached. Western powers have long played their “Great Game” in the region, but the results are more cautionary tale than model—though given the historical illiteracy of today’s elites, they’ll likely miss the lesson.
Aliyev’s regime leans heavily on UK investment, especially BP and over a hundred other British firms, making London the country’s largest backer, and the UK being the largest foreign investor.
And how we got to where were are, is a topic for another article, I’ve heard that perhaps the Armenian leadership, especially Pashinyan, are being bribed by Azerbaijani or Turkish sources, but you never know what tomorrow might reveal. It is particularly painful in his and Saakashvili’s case, as they came to power with much genuine excitement. Were they fooling everyone all along, were they tools, did they get in over their heads, or did they become corrupt along the way with all their power? Or is it a combination of the above?
Lessons from History
Allied intervention in the Russian civil war was poorly thought out, with unclear objectives, ambiguous orders to the commanders, and definite mission creep, especially in the case of the US interventions in Northern and Eastern Russia. All of this foreshadowed a number of failed US interventions in the 20th and now 21st Century, as Award-winning historian James Carl Nelson, author of “The Polar Bear Expedition” a study of the northern intervention stated:
“It didn’t really achieve anything – it was ill-conceived, the lessons were there that could’ve been applied in Vietnam and could’ve been applied in Iraq.”
While Jonathan Casey, director of archives at the World War I Museum, agrees.
“We didn’t have clear goals in mind politically or militarily,” he says. “We think we have an interest to protect, but it’s not really our interest to protect, or at least to make a huge effort at it. Maybe there are lessons we should’ve learned.”
No kidding
Unfortunately, the real aim of such “peace agreements” as reached by Trump between Azerbaijan and Armenia is not peace, but to sow further division and chaos. It is, I fear, the US objective to set the Caucasus and Central Asia on fire, to try and weaken Russia by forcing it to intervene in numerous hotspots.
This rings of Ukraine, with the ridiculous initial demand for a 30-day ceasefire still being stated as a US requirement, something totally unacceptable to Russia. What is even more astounding is Secretary of State, Marco Rubio’s, quite frankly ignorant statement that:
“For the first time, perhaps since this administration took office, we have concrete examples of what Russia would ask for to end the war. We haven’t had that before,”
It’s unclear whether Rubio is being dishonest, is out of his element, or simply obtuse, as Russia’s demands have been consistent since the start of the SMO: no NATO membership, limits on Ukraine’s armed forces, protection of minority rights (especially Russians), de-Nazification, and recognition of the referendums in regions Moscow claims as historically misassigned under Lenin (1919) and Khrushchev (1950s).
As the saying goes, “Are they deaf, or just stupid”
The US treats the situation, as with so many others, like a game of poker:if you have a bad hand, fold and try for the next round, but like the inveterate gamblers that they are, the US is now in the position of having bet the house, and the dealer is calling in the bills.
In conclusion, there are more questions than answers at the moment. What will be the modality of the American presence across Siunik? The Armenian government insists its jurisdiction will be upheld. The Azerbaijani government expects no interactions between their citizens and Armenian border guards or customs officials. How to square that circle? How will TRIPP handle consumer goods being transported vs. military equipment? How will the interactions across the Armenia-Iran border be affected?
Will the establishment of this TRIPP be it or is this development the beginning of the opening of all borders across Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan?
Here are some meaningful reactions as well, FYI.
Seth Ferris, investigative journalist and political scientist, expert on Middle Eastern affairs
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
