VarAlla

The Azerbaijani state-controlled Day.az has published an article full of insults against me, attempting to refute my post on X. In my article, I presented information obtained from diplomatic and security sources, that #Azerbaijan is attempts to persuade the new #US administration to approve its plan to seize a corridor from #Armenia. Baku is trying to frame this occupation as a strategically important move to block Iran from the north, claiming it could align with American interests. I noted that Baku predicts a scenario in which Israel strikes Iran’s nuclear facilities and is planning to seize a corridor from Armenia during that moment. Azerbaijan may also use the occupied corridor from Armenia to facilitate #China's "Middle Corridor" initiative, which involves cargo transportation from Central Asia to Europe. You can read my article at this link: nitter.gq/robananyan/status/1898… Besides the insults, the author, Elchin Alioghlu, the director of Baku Network, made several claims that, in reality, confirm my information about the existence of a Russian-Azerbaijani plan to occupy a corridor from Armenia. I will cite Day.az's claims in the original Russian but will respond in English. You can translate the Russian text into English․ 1․ Утверждения Ананяна о планах Азербайджана якобы "оккупировать Зангезурский коридор", чтобы заблокировать Иран и втянуть США в войну против Армении, являются не только абсурдными, но и противоречат здравому смыслу и международным реалиям. Day.az is distorting my post. You will not find a single line in my publication where I claim that Azerbaijan has a plan to drag the U.S. into a war against Armenia. What I stated is that Azerbaijan is trying to convince the new U.S. administration to approve its "plan" to blockade Iran from the north for seizing the Zangezur Corridor. I am convinced that a war against Armenia and the occupation of Armenian territories contradict U.S. strategic interests. Therefore, the U.S. cannot approve any plan of aggression against Armenia. This conviction applies to both President Biden’s and President Trump’s administrations. 2․ Ананян пытается представить Азербайджан как агрессора, якобы стремящегося развязать войну против Армении с целью "оккупации коридора". При этом он сознательно игнорирует фундаментальные реалии. Во-первых, Зангезурский коридор - законный транзитный маршрут: Согласно трехстороннему заявлению от 9 ноября 2020 года, подписанному президентами Азербайджана, России и премьер-министром Армении, Ереван обязался обеспечить безопасное передвижение по маршруту, соединяющему основную территорию Азербайджана с его эксклавом Нахчыван. Этот коридор должен функционировать исключительно как транспортный маршрут под контролем российских пограничников, без каких-либо претензий на армянскую территорию. Ананян умышленно игнорирует этот факт. Азербайджан действует в рамках международного права: Согласно нормам международного права, транспортные коридоры, которые обеспечивают транзитные перевозки, не могут рассматриваться как форма территориальной оккупации. Намеренно, и притом, очень безграмотно искажая юридические понятия, он использует такие приемы как инструмент пропаганды. Ананян пытается представить развитие законных коммуникационных маршрутов как агрессию. I am not trying to argue but rather asserting that Azerbaijan is an aggressor state. On September 13, 2022, Azerbaijan occupied 200 to 300 square kilometers of Armenian territory and refuses to return it to Armenia. In other words, Azerbaijan is indeed an occupying country. Azerbaijan has also violated the international principle of non-use of force and has declared war on Nagorno-Karabakh, forcibly displacing 150,000 Armenians and carrying out brutal ethnic cleansing. There is no document signed by the Prime Minister of Armenia obligating Armenia to provide a “Zangezur Corridor.” Armenia’s Prime Minister has not committed to granting an extraterritorial corridor to Russia and Azerbaijan under a corridor-based logic. That is a plan devised by Baku and Moscow, which they attempted to impose on Armenia through the threat of war. However, this attempt failed due to the efforts of the U.S., France, Iran, and the EU. I am not making assumptions about Azerbaijan’s plan to occupy a corridor from Armenia —Ilham Aliyev himself publicly stated this goal. In an April 20, 2021 interview with Azerbaijan’s state television, Aliyev said: “The creation of the ‘Zangezur Corridor’ fully aligns with Azerbaijan’s national, historical, and future interests. We are implementing the ‘Zangezur Corridor’ whether Armenia wants it or not. If they want, it will be easier to resolve this issue; if they don’t, we will resolve it by force.” Aliyev has never retracted his statement or said that he has abandoned his plan to seize a corridor from Armenia by force. Azerbaijan views regional unblocking not as an equal and mutual process but as an operation solely serving its own interests. For Azerbaijan, unblocking is not an economic project but rather war spoils that Armenia must surrender as a result of its so-called “capitulation.” Aliyev has repeatedly stated that Armenia has capitulated and must provide a corridor. The Russian-Azerbaijani interpretation of transport routes through Armenia follows an occupational logic. Day.az claims that, according to the November 9, 2020 statement, Russian border guards should control the route passing through Armenia. However, the statement actually says: “All economic and transport connections in the region are unblocked.” What road has Azerbaijan opened for Armenia through its own territory? None. The statement also says: “The Republic of Armenia guarantees the security of transport communication between the western regions of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic, ensuring the unimpeded movement of citizens, vehicles, and goods in both directions. The control over transport communication is carried out by the Border Service of Russia’s FSB.” Day.az is distorting the November 9 statement because it does not mention Russian border guards anywhere in relation to Armenia. Moreover, the withdrawal of Russian border guards from Iranian and Turkish borders has already begun. Along the Araks River, Russian outposts have been removed and replaced by Armenia’s Border Guard Service. Day.az is behind on events. Additionally, “controlling transport communication” does not mean physical presence on the road. Russian forces can monitor traffic via cameras and alert Armenian authorities in case of incidents. Armenia is the one guaranteeing security on that road, and this requires Armenian security forces to be present to ensure Azerbaijani citizens' safety. Armenia cannot guarantee road security by deploying Russian troops. Any Russian-Azerbaijani demand beyond this framework is a territorial claim against Armenia, as it implies military control by a foreign state over Armenia’s southern regions. Yes, Azerbaijan has repeatedly threatened Armenia with aggression, and I provided one of the many pieces of evidence above. Azerbaijan’s aggressive behavior is evident in its rejection of the principles of equality and reciprocity in regional unblocking. Azerbaijan also refuses to offer Armenia simplified and unrestricted transit through its own territory while demanding such privileges for itself. What is this, if not a plan to force Armenia into capitulation and a manifestation of aggression? Aggression is, by definition, the unilateral presentation of demands and the attempt to enforce them through war threats. Furthermore, Azerbaijan and Russia have completely violated the November 9 statement. Azerbaijan occupied Nagorno-Karabakh, which was the reason for the November 9 agreement in the first place. The Lachin Corridor no longer exists. Nagorno-Karabakh no longer exists. Armenian prisoners are still being held in Baku’s prisons, even though the November 9 statement mandated their release. 150,000 Armenians were forcibly displaced from their homes. Therefore, Azerbaijan cannot demand that Armenia comply with an agreement that Baku and Moscow have themselves violated. On the contrary, Azerbaijan is trying to use the voided November 9 statement as a pretext to claim an extraterritorial corridor from Armenia and create a false justification for military aggression. Armenia has never agreed to provide a corridor outside its jurisdiction. This is a fabrication by Baku, which Day.az is now repeating. 3․ Далее Ананян в своём заявлении спекулирует на теме стратегического партнерства между Азербайджаном и Китаем, пытаясь представить это соглашение как элемент некоего "захвата коридора" со стороны Баку. Однако его утверждения не соответствуют реальности и опираются на необоснованные предположения. Реальные факты говорят о другом, ибо соглашение между Азербайджаном и Китаем направлено на развитие логистической инфраструктуры и безопасные грузоперевозки. Day.az is once again fabricating and misrepresenting its publication. I did not write that the strategic partnership between Azerbaijan and China is an element of corridor occupation. I recalled that on July 3, 2024, Azerbaijan and China signed a strategic partnership agreement, which states: "The two countries will also support each other's efforts to ensure the security and uninterrupted operation of international transport corridors passing through their territories, creating favorable conditions for transit transportation within the framework of national legislation and bilateral agreements." Yes, I reiterate my assertion that if Azerbaijan seizes a corridor from Armenia under the false pretext of "encircling Iran from the north," there is a possibility that Azerbaijan could use the occupied corridor from Armenia to contribute to China's "Middle Corridor" initiative. China's involvement in the operation of this corridor will be necessary for Azerbaijan to "legitimize" the occupation of the "Zangezur Corridor." By involving the interests of a powerful player like China and operating the "Zangezur Corridor" outside Armenia's jurisdiction, Baku will indirectly force Armenia to accept the operation of a corridor beyond its authority. Today, this may seem like an unlikely scenario, but given that the Azerbaijan-China strategic agreement obliges both countries to create favorable conditions for transit transportation, this threat is a serious reality. As compensation for China's "service," Azerbaijan could repackage Chinese goods as Azerbaijani and transport them through the "Zangezur Corridor," which would be under Russian military control and exempt from customs and security checks, to transfer Turkey and then to Europe. In return for this service, Azerbaijan could receive financial dividends from China. In other words, Azerbaijan could use its privilege of conducting cargo transportation under preferential conditions through the "Zangezur Corridor" to transfer Chinese goods to Turkey and subsequently to Europe without customs clearance. This would make Chinese goods more competitive. This scenario aligns with the spirit and letter of the China-Azerbaijan strategic partnership agreement. And by directly or indirectly utilizing the "Zangezur Corridor," China would compel Armenia to come to terms with the Russian-Azerbaijani occupation. I understand that I am describing a complex scheme, but Azerbaijan could sell its exclusive rights over the "Zangezur Corridor" to China in exchange for Chinese military-political support in obtaining a corridor from Armenia and facilitating the cheap transportation of Chinese goods to Europe. Azerbaijan wants to obtain the "Zangezur Corridor" under Russian control so that the Russians can perform customs and security functions, allowing Russia to bypass Western sanctions. Russia's "control" also implies that Chinese goods will be transported to Europe without obstacles. In return for the service rendered to China, Russia could receive Chinese technologies. I am describing a geopolitical trade scheme that could materialize if they occupy the "Zangezur Corridor" from Armenia. I believe this does not align with U.S. interests. And this is where the U.S. may be interested in a scenario of reopening communications in Armenia to project its influence. It is interesting that Day.az has not been able to find any counterarguments to my assertion because my thesis is irrefutable and based on concrete information. Citing unclear points of international law does not, in itself, justify "Azerbaijan's good intentions." I trust Ilham Aliyev’s threats and the information available to me, as well as Baku and Moscow's talent for trading at Armenia’s expense. 4․ Армянские борзописец пытается представить развитие транспортной инфраструктуры как угрозу американским интересам, что также не выдерживает критики. США, напротив, заинтересованы в стабильности на Южном Кавказе, и Азербайджан играет в этом ключевую роль. Баку является единственной страной региона, которая последовательно поддерживает борьбу с терроризмом, активно сотрудничает с Вашингтоном в энергетической сфере и обеспечивает бесперебойный транзит энергоресурсов в Европу в обход России. Эти обстоятельства делают Азербайджан стратегическим партнером США, а не угрозой их интересам. First, let me say that I laughed a lot at the insulting word "борзописец," but let's move on to serious topics. You will not find a single word in my post where I present regional unblocking in the South Caucasus as contradicting American interests. I have already explained why Azerbaijan’s and Russia’s vision of regional unblocking contradicts American interests. Baku wants to turn part of Armenia’s territory into an object of Russian occupation. Russia has not received any right to occupy any road in Armenia. Armenia could not have agreed to the deployment of Russian troops on its territory in a context where security and customs rights over that area would later be alienated from Armenia and handed over to foreign forces. I am curious—why is Day.az lobbying so hard for Russian interests and repeatedly mentioning in its counter-article that Russian border guards should stand on the "Zangezur corridor" and ensure security? Sometimes, I get the impression that I am reading Maria Zakharova’s texts. Your interests are so identical that you even repeat the same theses verbatim. Day.az is trying to distort the U.S. approach to unblocking in the South Caucasus. According to the Armenia-U.S. strategic partnership agreement, Washington has supported Armenia’s "Crossroads of Peace" project, which also takes into account the interests of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey during the unblocking process. In other words, Armenia agrees to the principles of reciprocity and jurisdiction and does not demand unilateral dividends like Azerbaijan. Naturally, the U.S. supports the Armenian approach, which considers the interests of all stakeholders. 5․ Не останавливаясь на "достигнутом", армянин-псевдожурналист пытается представить Россию как страну, заинтересованную в оккупации Армении. Хотя согласно соглашению от 9 ноября 2020 года, российские пограничники обеспечивают безопасность коридора. Однако их присутствие не означает "оккупацию" или "аннексию" территории Армении. И самое главное - он сознательно игнорирует тот факт, что именно Армения в рамках трехстороннего заявления согласилась на участие российских миротворцев в контроле над коридором. Присутствие России обеспечивает стабильность и предотвращает возможные инциденты. My favorite part of Day.az’s counter-article is this—not because Elchin writes about me in an insulting tone, but because I see strong advocacy for Russia. In what part of the world has Russia ensured stability and prevented incidents that it should now do so on the "Zangezur corridor"? Russia, which has unleashed a bloody war against Ukraine, is supposed to ensure stability in the South Caucasus. This is a fantastic scenario. Of course, Azerbaijan must be satisfied with Russia’s behavior in Nagorno-Karabakh, thanks to which Azerbaijan occupied Karabakh, which was under the control of Russian "peacekeepers." Perhaps in the long run, Azerbaijan wants to repeat this scenario in Armenia’s territory as well. Maybe Azerbaijan has calculated that one day Russia could leave the "Zangezur corridor," yielding its place to Azerbaijan or Turkey. This is why Baku is engaged in Russian lobbying. There is no other justification for why Baku wants Russian border guards to control that road even more than Russia itself does. I do not disregard the existence of the trilateral statement. I have already explained that the reason for the November 9 statement—Karabakh—was occupied by Azerbaijan with Russia’s support. In other words, Russia and Azerbaijan have dismantled the architecture of the November 9 statement. Armenia cannot be forced to fulfill that statement if it has been dismantled by the other two sides. This is illogical. And yes, Russia’s presence on any road passing through Armenia is an act of occupation. Armenia has addressed Azerbaijan’s security concerns and has even proposed mechanisms today to ensure that Azerbaijanis feel safe while traveling through Armenia. Meanwhile, we have not seen any mechanisms proposed by Azerbaijan to ensure the safety of Armenians traveling through its territory. Moreover, what we do see is the ongoing "trial" in Baku of 23 Armenians, which is nothing more than a reprisal against these people simply because they are Armenian. 6. Роберт Ананян пытается убедить аудиторию в том, что США якобы стремятся установить контроль над транспортными маршрутами в регионе для ограничения влияния России и Китая. I have stated that the US could participate in the development of new regional infrastructure, including the construction of new railways and roads, which would mean an American presence in the unblocking process. Yes, it is in the US's interest to have a presence on one of the transport routes connecting Central Asian countries to Europe, which will pass through Armenia. And it is not in the US's interest for Russia or China to have control or participation in this route. Meanwhile, it is beneficial for Azerbaijan to have its strategic partner, Russia, present on the roads passing through Armenia, which it is trying to secure. I have also already explained why Azerbaijan is trying to involve China in the regional unblocking issue. You can reread the strategic partnership agreement between China and Azerbaijan. I also did not state that under the Armenia-US strategic cooperation document, the American side has committed to investing in regional communications. Day.az is once again falsifying information. 7․ США последовательно выступают за разблокирование всех региональных коммуникаций на Южном Кавказе, включая Зангезурский коридор. Эта позиция подтверждена многочисленными заявлениями американских официальных лиц, которые поддерживают открытие новых транспортных путей для содействия экономическому росту и стабильности в регионе. Day.az is distorting the US position on the issue of regional unblocking. Yes, the United States consistently supports the unblocking of all regional communications in the South Caucasus, but the US does not support Azerbaijan’s "Zangezur Corridor" project, as Day.az claims. There is no statement from any US official in which the American side expresses support for the "Zangezur Corridor." It is clear why the author has not provided any reference to a document or statement proving US support for the "Zangezur Corridor." On the contrary, under the Armenia-US Strategic Partnership Agreement, the US has supported Armenia’s proposed "Crossroads of Peace," which ensures equal opportunities for all stakeholders. Meanwhile, the "Zangezur Corridor" exclusively serves the interests of Azerbaijan and #Russia, and they will try to involve China in the game as well. 8․ Ананян, пытаясь представить гипотетический план американского контроля над коридорами в регионе, игнорирует эти факты и делает выводы, не подкреплённые реальной политикой Вашингтона. В действительности США стремятся к стабильности и экономическому развитию Южного Кавказа, а не к созданию новых конфликтных линий или конфронтации с Азербайджаном и Турцией. I have never tried to convince or explain to the US what its interests in the South Caucasus are. In the past and today, I see overlaps between the interests of Armenia and the US, which has led me to assert that we should deepen not only military-political relations but also move forward in the field of economic investments. I wrote an article on my page about possible Armenian-American cooperation in the security sector. In the near future, I may also write an article about joint economic programs. The active role of the US in the restoration of regional infrastructure will have not only economic significance but also geopolitical. This means that, within the logic of competition for global trade routes, the #USA may have an interest in restoring communications in the South Caucasus and being present. And since Azerbaijan serves the interests of Russia and China in the issue of regional unblocking, it is Azerbaijan itself that goes against US interests. I have never claimed that the US wants or should want to confront Azerbaijan and Turkey. The goal of occupying a corridor from Armenia was announced by President Ilham Aliyev in his interview on April 20, 2021. I advise Day.az to ask its patron president’s office why President Aliyev made such a threat, shaping the perception of Azerbaijan as an occupying country. Публикация Роберта Ананяна - это вопиющий пример грязной армянской пропаганды, основанной на лжи, манипуляциях и откровенной дезинформации. Его абсурдные утверждения о якобы готовящейся "оккупации коридора" Азербайджаном, о "планах втянуть США в войну" и о "содействии блокаде Ирана" - не просто вымысел, а целенаправленная попытка исказить реальность и запугать мировое сообщество. The thesis of blockading Iran from the north by seizing a corridor from Armenia has been discussed among Azerbaijan’s military-political and diplomatic representatives, and a decision has been made to persuade the United States of this idea. Azerbaijan sees that the US and Israel are likely to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, which would mean the outbreak of a new and large-scale war between Iran, Israel, and the US. Iran and the US have always opposed Aliyev and Putin’s plans to seize a corridor from Armenia. Over the past five years, Putin and Aliyev have tried to convince Iran to agree to this plan. In July 2022, Erdoğan and Putin traveled to Iran to hold a summit with Supreme Leader Khamenei on the Syrian peace process. Khamenei publicly told Erdoğan and Putin that Iran would categorically oppose the blockade of Armenia’s borders: “Of course, if there is a policy to close the border between Iran and Armenia, the Islamic Republic will oppose it because this border has been a transit link for millennia,” Khamenei said. Iran has always felt the threat that an attempt could be made to block its connection with Armenia. If strikes are carried out on Iran’s nuclear facilities, there is a high risk that Azerbaijan will attack Armenia’s southern regions to seize the "Zangezur Corridor." Azerbaijan’s calculation is that #Iran, being drawn into a war with Israel and the US, will not be able to open a second front against Azerbaijan to defend southern Armenia. Baku will consider the Iranian factor almost neutralized if Iran’s nuclear facilities are struck. For Iran, protecting its nuclear facilities will be a greater priority than stopping Azerbaijan’s blitzkrieg aimed at blocking Armenia’s border. This is why Azerbaijan has focused its diplomatic efforts on the US, trying to persuade Washington that seizing the "Zangezur Corridor" could be part of the strategy to bring Iran to its knees and suffocate it. By pushing this false narrative, Baku seeks Washington’s understanding regarding the occupation of Armenia’s southern regions. I am convinced that the US will not approve Baku’s reckless adventure. The fact that Day.az, which is controlled by Aliyev’s administration, has decided to counter my warning means that I have hit the target and exposed Baku’s aggressive plans. I hope my warning will serve as a signal for Western partners not to fall for Azerbaijan’s false narratives.

According to my diplomatic sources, #Azerbaijan is planning to persuade the new #USA administration that occupying the "Zangezur Corridor" from #Armenia would completely blockade Iran from the north, thereby making military action against Armenia align with American interests. Exploiting the #US desire to contain Iran, Azerbaijan seeks to convince President Donald Trump’s administration of the "necessity" of military aggression against Armenia. Now, I will explain why this contradicts U.S. interests and why this plan is highly likely to be rejected. You can support my work by donating through Buy Me a Coffee. It’s important. Your donation will help me continue posting analytics regularly on X. Link here: buymeacoffee.com/robananyans On July 3, 2024, #China and Azerbaijan signed a strategic partnership agreement, which also includes cooperation on regional communications. The Azerbaijan-China agreement states: "The two countries will also support each other’s efforts to ensure the security and uninterrupted operation of international transport corridors passing through their territories, creating favorable conditions for transit transportation within the framework of national legislation and bilateral agreements." This means that if Azerbaijan occupies a corridor from Armenia under the false pretext of "blockade Iran from the north," there is a possibility that Azerbaijan could use the occupied corridor from Armenia to facilitate China’s Middle Corridor initiative. Besides Azerbaijan, China has also signed a strategic partnership agreement with Georgia. In May 2024, a Chinese consortium won the tender to operate #Georgia’s #Anaklia deep-sea port. The first phase of the port’s capacity will be 600,000 containers (7.8 thousand tons), with an estimated cost of $600 million. If I am not mistaken, this port was built with American funding, but a Chinese company will operate it. This suggests that Chinese cargo will be transported through Central Asian countries, then through Azerbaijan, Georgia, and the Black Sea to #Europe. However, by occupying a corridor in Armenia, Azerbaijan could offer China an alternative transportation route. This would be necessary for Azerbaijan to "legitimize" its occupation of the corridor and, by involving a powerful player like China, to force Armenia to accept the occupation. Today, this may seem like an unlikely scenario, but considering that the Azerbaijan-China strategic agreement commits both countries to creating favorable conditions for transit transportation, this possibility cannot be ruled out. Naturally, the function of "ensuring the security" of this route can be assigned to Russia, which insists that, according to the November 9, 2020 statement, it has the right to control the corridor connecting Azerbaijan and #Turkey through Armenian territory. This means that it is not necessary for Chinese troops to be physically present. Azerbaijan could occupy the corridor under the false pretext of "blockade Iran" transfer control to Russia, and involve China in its use. If, through a new war, Azerbaijan and Russia manage to force Armenia to accept Russian "security services" on the occupied corridor (which Azerbaijan calls the Zangezur Corridor), this would mean that China would also gain the ability to transport its cargo freely through Armenian territory. Since Russia and Azerbaijan seek to establish a route beyond Armenia’s jurisdiction, where the Armenian side would have no security or customs control, this would place China and Russia in an unchecked position regarding freight transport through southern Armenia. This would not result in Iran's blockade from the north; rather, it would provide a cheap transportation route for China and lead to the Russian-Azerbaijani occupation of Armenia. However, I am confident that it is in the U.S.'s profitable for the Azerbaijan-Turkey road routes passing through Armenia to remain under Armenian control rather than #Russian-#Azerbaijani-#Chinese control. If the transport routes passing through Armenian territory remain under Armenian sovereignty, the U.S. will have the opportunity to maintain oversight of those routes. On January 14, 2025, Armenia and the U.S. signed a Strategic Partnership Agreement. The document emphasizes the sovereignty and jurisdiction of states in the context of unblocking transport communications. The Armenia-U.S. agreement states that Armenia is landlocked and faces challenges due to limited access to global trade markets. Washington supports #Yerevan’s integration into broader regional transport networks by promoting Armenia’s "Crossroads of Peace" initiative. According to my information, Donald #Trump’s administration has agreed to the Armenia-U.S. Strategic Partnership Agreement, making it crucial for the U.S. to support and participate in implementing the "Crossroads of Peace" initiative, which envisions unblocking all regional communication routes while respecting the jurisdiction of the countries involved. In the event of regional unblocking, new railway networks will need to be built not only in southern Armenia but also the #Kars-#Gyumri railway, which would restore rail connectivity between Armenia and #Turkey. Currently, Armenia’s railway system is managed by the Russian-owned South Caucasus Railway company, which has violated its investment obligations. Reports indicate millions of dollars in financial mismanagement. This provides grounds for Armenia to terminate the concession agreement with the Russian company. I believe that American companies could participate not only in the construction of the Gyumri-Kars railway and the planned railway system in the Meghri region but also in taking over the concession management of Armenia’s railway infrastructure. Armenia’s railway system is outdated and underdeveloped, meaning that significant investments will be required from the American side. However, in the long run, managing Armenia’s railway system could be a profitable. Southern Armenia is a strategically important area, and having a presence there aligns with the interests of global players. This would also allow the U.S. to be present on the transportation routes passing through Armenia. By cooperating with Armenia, the U.S. could assume certain oversight functions, assisting in customs and security processes. In other words, the U.S. could prevent the implementation of the false "#Iran blockade" plan and play a role in launching railway and road transport routes through southern Armenia. The U.S. could secure the position that Azerbaijan planned for China and Russia. This would not only ensure an economic presence for the U.S. but also provide economic and security benefits. American companies could be involved in regional unblocking programs in the South Caucasus, including the construction, operation, and oversight of roads and railways. This is a realistic idea that may interest President Donald Trump’s administration. Hopefully, in the near future, we will see greater U.S. involvement in establishing peace in the South Caucasus. How this can be achieved will be presented in another post.