The Zangezur Corridor: Historical Background, Current Dynamics, and Future Perspectives

Tashkent, Uzbekistan (UzDaily.com) — Ethnic Divisions and Language Policies in the Soviet Period

From Tsarist Russia through the Soviet Union, ethnic and linguistic divisions were deliberately reinforced. Russian was designated as the common language among the peoples of the USSR, while the native languages of other peoples were fragmented into dialects, thereby deepening separations.

In this process, cultural and political hegemony was exercised through Russian identity and the Russian language.

Artificial Borders and Dependency Mechanism Inherited from the Soviets

With the dissolution of the USSR, Russia imposed artificial borders among the newly independent states, leaving behind disputed areas. In the conflicts arising within these regions, Russia sometimes acted as a mediator and at other times as a party, thereby maintaining its dominance in the region.

During the Soviet period, Russians constituted the “brains” of production in large factories. After the collapse, many of these specialists migrated to Russia, leading to factory closures and increasing the economic dependency of the new states on Russia.

Azerbaijan–Armenia Conflicts and the Role of Iran

Conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia were fueled for years, and with the occupation of Azerbaijani territories, a deep enmity was fostered between the two nations. In these conflicts, Russia intervened either as a mediator or as a balancing power, sustaining the region’s dependence on itself.

Iran, on the other hand, sought both to gain influence in the Azerbaijani territories under Armenian occupation and to block the emergence of a strong Azerbaijani state.

Iran’s main motivations can be summarized as follows:

To keep the Azerbaijani Turks within Iran under control,

To dominate, together with Russia, the economic resources of the Turkic world,

To maintain a strategic position between Turkey and the Turkic world, as well as between the EU and the Turkic world, in terms of land and rail connectivity,

To preserve its strategic role along the trade route stretching from China to Europe.

The Strategic Importance of the Zangezur Corridor

The Zangezur Corridor is not merely a line facilitating transportation between Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan. At the same time, it is a strategic corridor that will enable:

Turkey’s connection with the Turkic world,

The Turkic world’s connection with Europe by land.

With this feature, the corridor is situated at the center of the New Silk Road projection. However, the strongest objections to the corridor come not only from Armenia but also from Russia and Iran. This is because, once opened, the Azerbaijan–Nakhchivan–Turkey connection will occur without reliance on Iran, and the region’s development mission will advance without being obstructed by Russian dominance. Russia’s control over what it considers its “backyard” would thereby weaken. Armenia’s concern, in this context, can be summarized as the loss of its limited leverage over the corridor.

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s Vision of Nakhchivan and the Zangezur Corridor

The importance of Zangezur also draws attention historically.

In 1932, with the border agreement between Iran and Turkey, Turkey secured a land connection to Nakhchivan.

Atatürk described Nakhchivan as the “Gate of Turan” and instructed the delegations sent to Moscow to act with sensitivity on this issue.

Although the Bolsheviks sought to give Nakhchivan to Armenia, Turkey’s initiatives ensured that it remained Azerbaijani territory.

These developments demonstrate that the Zangezur Corridor is not only a contemporary issue but also a deep-rooted geopolitical matter.

Ilham Aliyev’s Strategy on Karabakh and the Zangezur Corridor

The strategy pursued by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev regarding Karabakh and Zangezur is based on a multidimensional balance policy. Aliyev mobilized Azerbaijan’s diaspora power and used it effectively to secure strategic gains in the Second Karabakh War. He also reinforced his country’s strategic and economic potential through projects supporting regional development. Particularly through support for development models under the framework of “Bonds of Friendship” with Caspian littoral states, he strengthened regional economic cooperation.

At the same time, Aliyev prioritized technological investments, especially in the defense industry, aiming to increase Azerbaijan’s military and strategic capacity. Diplomacy conducted with the West and Russia prior to the Karabakh War, cooperation developed with Israel, and most importantly, the strategic partnership with Turkey were critical components of this process. Turkey’s military capabilities, war experience, and diaspora power provided Azerbaijan with significant advantages during and after the war.

Considering that the post-Soviet states (except Russia) remained militarily weak and technologically underdeveloped, Turkey’s provision of training, experience transfer, and strategic support to the Azerbaijani army was decisive in the outcome of the Second Karabakh War. Through its long-term military cooperation with Turkey, Azerbaijan gained not only on the battlefield but also in the realm of military strategy development.

In the post-war period, Aliyev benefited from Turkey’s infrastructure expertise to initiate the reconstruction of Karabakh. Through policies of infrastructure, security, and resettlement, he gained the trust of the local population. His friendly and inclusive approach toward the Armenian population, and efforts to improve the economic and social conditions of all inhabitants without discrimination, were received positively both internationally and within Armenian public opinion. Thus, Azerbaijan rose to the position of a significant actor in building peace and stability in the region, gaining support not only from its own society but also from the international community.

Trump’s International Peace and Prosperity Road Initiative

On August 8, 2025, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan met under the auspices of U.S. President Donald Trump and signed a joint declaration.

With this declaration, the Zangezur (Turan) Corridor was transferred for 99 years to U.S. operation under the title of the “Trump International Peace and Prosperity Road Connectivity Project.” In this way, another distinct and historical threshold was crossed toward the opening of the corridor.

The joint photograph of the First Ladies of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Turkey in China may symbolize the coming spring and peace for the region.

The 25th Summit of the Council of Heads of State of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) was held in Tianjin, China, on September 1, 2025. At the summit, the joint photograph of Mehriban Aliyeva, Emine Erdoğan, and Anna Hakobyan attracted significant attention from both the region and the international public.

This symbolic yet deeply meaningful image was interpreted as a sign of a new era for the region and the blossoming of hope. According to many observers, the photograph was seen as a herald of a spring filled with peace and prosperity in the South Caucasus.

Possible Effects of the Zangezur (Trump) Corridor

In terms of diplomatic relations:

It may strengthen diplomatic relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia through peace,

It may improve Turkey–Armenia relations,

It may further Armenia’s rapprochement with the West,

It may deepen Azerbaijan’s ties with Israel and the United States.

In terms of transportation connectivity:

It may diversify land and rail routes between Europe, Asia, and Turkestan (Central Asia),

The Turkic world may connect directly to Europe through Turkey,

The transportation of energy resources from Kazakhstan and other regional states via the Caspian may be enhanced.

In terms of possible economic impacts:

Europe’s dependence on Russian energy may decrease,

The influence of Iran and Russia on regional trade may diminish,

With the stability to come, regional investments may diversify and trade may be revitalized.

In terms of global trade impacts:

The project may be a strategic initiative within the framework of China’s Belt and Road Initiative; however, issues such as U.S. control could create problems in the future,

Trade routes to Europe may diversify,

As in the historical Silk Road, cultural and economic diversity may increase again, thereby raising the prosperity level of the region,

If regional power balances are managed cooperatively, stability and prosperity may increase; if not, interventions by Russia, China, the U.S., and Iran may turn the region into an arena of renewed conflict.

In Conclusion: What Awaits the Region?

The future of the corridor does not depend solely on peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia. The most critical questions are:

How will Russia, China, and Iran respond to U.S. initiatives in the region?

If the U.S. seeks monopolization in the corridor, could new conflicts be triggered?

In summary, at this juncture, the cooperation or conflict of global powers may bring either prosperity or renewed confrontations to the region.

Ahmet Sağlam 

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of UzDaily.