Iran has issued a sharp rebuke of a U.S.-brokered plan to establish a strategic transport corridor through Armenia, warning the move risks destabilizing the South Caucasus and threatens its national interests. The criticism follows the signing of an agreement in Washington on Friday by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, and former U.S. President Donald Trump to develop the Zangezur corridor—a route connecting mainland Azerbaijan to its Nakhichevan exclave via a strip of Armenian territory bordering Iran. Under the deal, the U.S. would manage the corridor under a 99-year lease, subcontracting construction and operations to a private consortium.
While Tehran publicly endorsed efforts to normalize Armenia-Azerbaijan relations after years of conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, Iranian officials condemned Washington’s proposed oversight as a “geopolitical scheme.” They argue the project would sever Iran’s land connection to Armenia, enable foreign military activity near its borders, and undermine regional security frameworks. Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior aide to Iran’s Supreme Leader, accused the U.S. and Israel of orchestrating the plan to isolate Iran and Russia while redirecting Western attention from Ukraine to the Caucasus. “This corridor will not be a transit route in Trump’s possession but a graveyard for his mercenaries,” Velayati stated, alleging NATO and pan-Turkic groups are collaborating to enforce a “land blockade” against Tehran and Moscow.
Russia, a traditional power broker in the region, struck a more measured tone. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova reiterated support for regional stability but emphasized that solutions should emerge from local actors and neighboring states, including Russia, Iran, and Turkey. She highlighted existing trilateral agreements among Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russia following the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, noting that Russian forces continue to guard Armenia’s border with Iran under a 1992 treaty. Moscow’s stance reflects a balancing act: welcoming diplomatic progress while defending its influence against perceived Western encroachment.
The corridor dispute underscores broader tensions over control of Eurasian trade routes and military positioning. The proposed path through Syunik Province—Armenia’s sole direct link to Iran—has long been contested, with Azerbaijan seeking land access to Nakhichevan and Turkey. Iran, which shares a 44-kilometer border with Armenia, views the area as critical to maintaining regional connectivity and countering isolation efforts. Analysts suggest Tehran’s opposition stems partly from fears that U.S. involvement could marginalize its role in Caucasus diplomacy and enable monitoring of nearby military sites.
As the deal moves forward, questions linger over Armenia’s capacity to balance sovereignty claims with external pressures. While Yerevan framed the agreement as a step toward economic integration, opposition figures domestically have criticized perceived concessions to Azerbaijan. The U.S., meanwhile, seeks to position itself as a mediator in a region traditionally dominated by Russian and Iranian influence—a shift that has drawn skepticism from regional powers and raised the stakes for ongoing negotiations.
