Introduction

SpecialEurasia’s recent official mission to Yerevan for the Yerevan Dialogue 2026 offered a unique opportunity to engage directly with regional stakeholders at a moment of profound geopolitical transformation.

During this visit, the team met with H.E. Khalil Shirgholami the Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Republic of Armenia, whose perspective is essential for understanding the evolving dynamics of the South Caucasus.

In this exclusive interview, the Ambassador reflects on the civilizational depth of Iranian‑Armenian relations, the strategic ambitions behind the forthcoming Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement, and the shared commitment to safeguarding regional stability amid shifting global pressures. He also addresses the challenges posed by external actors, the realities behind international perceptions of Iran, and the economic corridors that could redefine connectivity from the Persian Gulf to the Black Sea.

What emerges is a vision of bilateral cooperation rooted not merely in diplomacy, but in a millennia‑old cultural bond that continues to shape political choices, economic strategies, and regional security frameworks. This conversation provides valuable insight into how Tehran and Yerevan imagine their future partnership—one built on strategic clarity, mutual respect, and a shared determination to ensure peace and prosperity for their peoples.

Your Excellency, diplomacy is often viewed through the technical lens of treaties and borders, but at its heart, the relationship between Iran and Armenia is a bridge between two millennial cultures that have coexisted and enriched one another for centuries. In an era of rapid global change and external pressures, how can you leverage this profound historical and cultural depth to ensure that your bilateral ties remain not just a political necessity, but a living example of civilizational solidarity for the entire region?

“As you mentioned, relations between countries can have different reasons or logics; they can have an agreement-based and conventional logic, or they can have a civilizational and cultural logic. The relations between Iran and Armenia, as you correctly pointed out, are based on the civilizational and cultural connection and bond between the two nations, which dates back a very long time.

This civilizational connection or bond elevates the relations beyond a mere state of fleeting or short-term interests and creates ties or reasons that add depth to the relationship. This means the relations flow within the context of a historical and civilizational bond, which can serve as a model for Iran’s relations with other countries in the region, including in the South Caucasus.

Furthermore, it helps this historical and civilizational solidarity translate into a capacity for greater integration and cooperation, ensuring that the mutual interests of both sides—the two nations and the nations that are supposed to work together—are pursued more deeply within this context, ultimately yielding long-term benefits for them.”

Your Excellency, Iran and Armenia share a border that hasn’t just existed for centuries but has thrived as a portal of stability amidst regional turbulence. As both nations look toward signing a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement in 2026, how do you envision this document growing your relationship from one of ‘neighbourly support’ to a truly integrated strategic alliance for the next 50 years?

“Look, the relations between Iran and Armenia are special and distinguished; they possess various dimensions and flow through different channels. At the same time, we have reached a stage of maturity in our relationship where we require a document to provide a long-term and strategic definition of these relations and, in fact, to institutionalise them.

The Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Document is being drafted with this objective in mind: to serve as the roadmap for relations in the coming decades. It aims to define the various dimensions of the relationship through a long-term and strategic lens, so that the politicians and statesmen of both countries know what the roadmap, the guiding path, and the lofty goals are as we continue the path ahead in Iran-Armenia relations. Therefore, moving beyond a mere neighbourly connection, the relations can enter a structure based on strategic thinking and establish long-term definitions for all areas of the relationship.”

Iran has been very clear about its ‘red lines’ regarding geopolitical changes and the sovereignty of borders in the South Caucasus. In the context of the ‘Crossroads of Peace’ initiative, how can Armenia and Iran ensure that new transit routes remain tools for regional prosperity rather than becoming venues for the influence of external powers that may not share the interests of your immediate region?

“Yes, Iran has previously and clearly declared its red line regarding any geopolitical and border changes in the South Caucasus region. Any initiative intended to be implemented in the region must acknowledge the important reality that geopolitical and border changes are unacceptable.

The presence of non-regional and external actors in the region, along with the objectives and interests they pursue, does not necessarily lead to peace, prosperity, and development. It can turn the area into a battlefield for destructive, negative competitions and can cause deep rifts among regional actors and countries.

Therefore, within the framework of any initiative concerning transit and corridors in the region, realities must be recognised, the interests of intra-regional actors must be considered, and the cooperation of intra-regional actors for development programs— including in the fields of transit and connectivity—must be clearly defined.

Moreover, the possibility of extra-regional actors exploiting the newly created capacities for security purposes must be prevented. This is Iran’s red line.

At the same time, while Iran believes that greater openness and connectivity can contribute to the development of the South Caucasus region, it firmly maintains that these important considerations must absolutely be taken into account.”

Iran is often portrayed through a very specific lens in Western media, yet its diplomatic footprint in Yerevan suggests a policy of pragmatism and regional integration. As a career diplomat, how do you navigate the gap between these international perceptions and the ‘on-the-ground’ reality of Iranian-Armenian friendly cooperation?

“The reality is that misinformation, misperceptions and disinformation campaigns regarding Iran have long been underway and continue to persist. The realities of Iran and the realities of its policies have been overlooked. In the context of our country’s relations with Armenia, which you noted are characterised by pragmatism and a commitment to regional integration, the reality is that Tehran adopts the same approach toward all of its neighbours.

The neighbourhood policy constitutes the central pillar of Iran’s foreign policy. The misperceptions of others, or their illegitimate interests in creating regional divides and sowing discord among regional actors, are unfortunately an inauspicious and negative phenomenon that has exacerbated rifts and created issues and challenges among countries.

Iran-Armenia relations are formed on a foundation of reality, historical and civilizational bonds, the supreme interests and benefits of the two nations, and geopolitical territorial geography. Regardless of what others may perceive in this regard, this narrative is continuing to develop, and we have significant plans to deepen it in the future.”

H.E. Khalil Shirgholami, Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Republic of Armenia

With the global economy facing high volatility due to recent conflicts, the North-South Transport Corridor and the gas-for-electricity swaps have become vital lifelines. Last year, the Yerevan Dialogue 2025 also highlighted the proposal for a transit corridor linking Iran to the Black Sea via Armenia. Beyond these existing projects, what ‘new frontiers’ of economic cooperation do you believe could make the Armenian-Iranian partnership more resilient against external economic pressures?

“Yes, there are significant capacities between Iran and Armenia that have not yet been activated and could be placed on the agenda. One of the most important of these capacities, within the framework of unblocking routes in both the East-West and North-South directions, is the possibility of a railway connection from Iran via the Jolfa route through Nakhchivan to Yerevan in Armenia, and its continuation to Georgia and the Black Sea ports. This can create a massive capacity as one of the branches of the North-South Corridor, enabling the connection of the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman to the Black Sea.

India has signed a free trade agreement with the European Union encompassing a population of two billion, and the transit capacity of Iran, Armenia, and Georgia can cover a substantial portion of this trade. Therefore, if we can activate this transit capacity between Iran, Armenia, and Georgia, it will yield tremendous benefits for all three countries.

Some of the economic pressures or illegitimate economic sanctions against Iran have existed and persisted for decades regardless; however, at the same time, the countries of the region have reached a new awakening and awareness that they must pursue the interests of their own nations independent of the pressures of this or that party, and seek to realise the maximum benefits for their own countries.”

Given the trauma of recent wars in this region, what is your message to the Armenian and Iranian people who are looking for a definitive end to the cycle of conflict? How does Iran’s vision for a ‘Regional 3+3’ format provide a better path to peace?

“Iran’s effort and vital priority have been to ensure that the aggressive war waged against our country does not have a negative impact on the region of our northern borders and the South Caucasus region. Given the importance we attach to the interests and well-being of our neighbours, all of Iran’s effort was focused on ensuring that this war had the absolute minimum negative impact on the South Caucasus region.

We communicated this to our Armenian friends as well and made great efforts to ensure that the interactions between the two countries, border connectivity, and mutual travel maintained their normal conditions as much as possible. Tehran has never sought war and conflict, nor does it now. Iran was subjected to aggression and defended itself.

Tehran has always been ready to pursue the logic of diplomacy within an equitable framework. This policy still stands, and if it were not for the excessive demands of the United States, the capacity to establish peace naturally exists. However, regardless of whether a sustainable peace is achieved or not, the security of the South Caucasus region and the security of Armenia remain an important and indispensable priority for us.”