Recent developments surrounding the TRIPP initiative pose serious risks for Armenia, especially given the complex regional and geopolitical environment. This view is expressed by international relations expert Armen Manvelyan.
According to him, statements coming from Iran indicate deep concern in Tehran about the project, despite assurances by Armenian authorities that active discussions are underway with the Iranian side and that no problems exist.
Iran’s strong signals and dangerous rhetoric
Manvelyan recalls that Iran’s ambassador recently stated openly that Tehran fears the United States may use TRIPP for its own military and geopolitical interests. Moreover, rhetoric has already emerged suggesting that Armenia could turn into a hub for anti-Iranian activities.
“This is an extremely dangerous development. If Armenia begins to be perceived as an anti-Iranian platform, it could sharply worsen relations with Iran and create new security threats,” the expert warns.
The collapse of international law and the “rule of force”
Manvelyan stresses that these developments are unfolding amid the effective collapse of the former system of international relations and international law.
“The legal order that once regulated relations between states no longer exists. Today, only the rule of force applies. Law itself means nothing if there is no power behind it,” he says.
As examples, Manvelyan points to Russia’s war in Ukraine, driven by geopolitical and national interests, as well as US actions toward Venezuela, which he argues were also carried out under the logic of national security.
TRIPP as part of Armenia’s “sell-off”
According to Manvelyan, both the TRIPP initiative and the recently signed framework document on the establishment of a consortium fit into a broader logic that is dangerous for Armenia’s statehood.
“Under that document, Armenia would control only about 24 percent of its own road. This is yet another disgraceful document and is directly linked to the logic Aliyev spoke about years ago, when he said that they would enter Yerevan not with tanks, but with cars,” the analyst emphasizes.
He argues that this path of “entering by cars” is now being paved step by step through concessions.
“There is no need to conquer Armenia by war. Under the current authorities, attempts are being made to do so through economic instruments — for example, through so-called cheap fuel imports, which can be seen as a form of electoral bribery by Azerbaijan,” Manvelyan says, adding that such mechanisms may multiply.