Amid geopolitical instability and increasing foreign policy pressure on Armenia, the upcoming trilateral meeting in Washington between Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, and U.S. President Donald Trump is generating significant attention and mixed assessments. Despite the stated goals of promoting peace and regional stability, many experts view the summit as a tool of American influence and an attempt to strengthen U.S. positions in the South Caucasus.
Washington’s Peacemaking Show
In an interview with VECTORS.am, Polish political scientist and Myśl Polska columnist Mateusz Piskorski expressed doubts about the effectiveness of the Washington meeting in achieving a long-term resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. He warned of potential hidden U.S. interests in the context of its rivalry with Iran and efforts to contain China.
Piskorski believes the planned meeting between Pashinyan and Aliyev in Washington on August 7-8 is unlikely to lead to a lasting solution or a formal agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan. He described the summit as an attempt by the U.S. to capitalize on Russia’s temporary preoccupation with other issues and establish itself as a key player in the geopolitical game in the South Caucasus.
“It’s likely that Trump won’t secure an agreement. At best, a brief memorandum will be signed, lacking any specific timelines for a deal between Baku and Yerevan,” Piskorski said.
According to him, the strategic interests of the U.S. administration and Donald Trump lie in consolidating U.S. influence globally. Additionally, Piskorski noted, Trump personally seeks to reinforce his global image as a peacemaker capable of resolving conflicts anywhere in the world.
“We’ve seen this recently with the India-Pakistan conflict. Perhaps, realizing that diplomatic success in other areas is unlikely in the current environment, Trump is trying to engage in the peace process in the South Caucasus and normalize relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia,” the political scientist remarked.
Not Just a Hostile Azerbaijan, but an Unsupportive Armenia
Piskorski also views U.S. activism in the context of U.S.-Iran and Israel-Iran tensions.
“It would certainly benefit the U.S. administration to ensure that, north of Iran’s borders, there is not only an Azerbaijan friendly to Israel, which aids in various plans, including drone attacks on Iranian territory, but also an Armenia that does not support Iran. The U.S. wants to guarantee that Armenia will not cooperate with or serve as a transport corridor for Tehran,” he said.
Regarding the so-called “Zangezur Corridor,” Piskorski noted its importance to the U.S. administration, not only for isolating Iran.
“I’m not sure to what extent the corridor could legally be handed over to, say, an American company… Some Armenian politicians and experts believe this could serve as a U.S. security guarantee, but I think the U.S. is pursuing its own geopolitical objectives,” he added.
Countering China’s Plans
One of the U.S.’s primary political goals is to at least hinder China’s plans, Piskorski argued.
“As we understand, the ‘Zangezur Corridor’ could become a small but significant part of one branch of China’s New Silk Road initiative. To obstruct or control this transport corridor branch, the U.S. may at least declare its readiness to invest in the project,” he said.
The U.S. as a Temporary Stabilizing Factor
However, Piskorski questioned the effectiveness of U.S. security guarantees for Armenia itself.
“It’s unclear to what extent these security guarantees would hold in the event of new disagreements or conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan… Temporarily, yes, this could be seen as a factor stabilizing Armenia-Azerbaijan relations,” the expert concluded.
The interview was conducted by Marina Brutyan