Recent developments in the South Caucasus, with the announcement of an agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan to create the “Zangezur Corridor” through direct U.S. mediation, could bring significant changes to Iran’s surrounding environment. Granting Washington the exclusive right to manage this passage for 99 years would enable a sustained American presence at a strategic point between three key players — Iran, Russia, and Turkey. However, the consequences for Iran remain in the realm of possibilities and differing scenarios; it cannot yet be regarded solely as a definitive threat.
Possible Geopolitical Dimensions
If implemented, the Zangezur Corridor could connect Azerbaijan to Nakhchivan and from there to Turkey, without crossing Iranian territory. Depending on how Iran manages this diplomatically and economically, the change could either reduce Tehran’s share in regional transit or, if used wisely, become an opportunity to define alternative routes and multilateral agreements. In the pessimistic scenario, Iran would become a replaceable transit route; in a middle-ground scenario, Tehran could maintain its position by expanding transit cooperation through Armenia, Georgia, or even maritime routes.
Possible Security and Political Dimensions
U.S. management of this corridor could, in the long term, provide a platform for NATO’s intelligence and logistical activities along Iran’s northwest border, though this would depend on the nature of its presence and the degree to which the corridor relies on military infrastructure. Lifting restrictions on U.S. military cooperation with Baku could enhance Azerbaijan’s defense capabilities, potentially affecting the balance of power. Nevertheless, both Armenia and Baku remain entangled in domestic sensitivities and international pressures, and full implementation of this scenario could face political obstacles.
Proposed Strategies for Iran
Given the potential nature of this agreement’s consequences, Iran could consider a multilayered course of action:
Active Caucasus diplomacy: Increase consultations with Armenia and Azerbaijan to secure mutual interests and prevent Iran’s complete exclusion from transit arrangements.
Development of alternative routes: Invest promptly in transit corridors such as the Caspian–Caucasus–Europe route or rail connections to Georgia to reduce vulnerability.
Regional coalition-building: Cooperate with Russia and Central Asian countries to launch joint projects that secure Iran’s role in regional supply chains.
Preventive security measures: Strengthen intelligence and border security capacities in the northwest, especially in monitoring logistical and infrastructural movements.
Economic and soft-power tools: Use energy diplomacy, electricity and gas exports, and cooperation in cultural and educational fields to establish long-term ties with northern neighbors.
At present, the Zangezur Corridor is more of a potential project than an established reality. Its impact on Iran’s geopolitical standing will depend on Tehran’s response and initiatives. Should Iran view this development purely as a threat and adopt a passive approach, it risks losing influence and agency. But if it employs diplomatic, transit, and security tools, the change could become an opportunity for strategic realignment — and even for strengthening Iran’s position in the Caucasus.
NOURNEWS