“Telecom Armenia”-“Azertelecom” agreement. technical news or a broader infrastructural process? 

The internet transit agreement signed between the Armenian “Telecom Armenia” and the Azerbaijani “Azertelecom” companies is about regional digital infrastructures, channel diversification, mutual transit, but also about national security, controllability and public trust.

Confirmed fact

According to public information, the parties have signed a bilateral agreement, which provides for the transit and delivery of Internet traffic through the territories of Armenia and Azerbaijan on a commercial basis.

The Armenian side emphasizes that “Telecom Armenia” will provide transit to Azerbaijan with its infrastructure. The Azerbaijani side, in its turn, presents the same agreement as providing a new path for Armenia’s international internet connection through the territory of Azerbaijan.

In other words, the fact is the same, but the emphasis of the public presentation is different.

The difference in emphasis

In Armenian communications, the agreement is presented as an opportunity for mutual transit and expansion of Armenia’s transit potential.

In the Azerbaijani communication, it is best placed in the strategy of Azerbaijan to become a regional digital hub.

This is not a trifle. In the region, infrastructures are no longer just economic issues, but also instruments of influence, dependence, control and political positioning.

Armenia’s possible interest

If the process is managed correctly, Armenia can benefit in three directions.

get additional diversification of external Internet channels,

to strengthen the role of Armenia as a country providing transit digital services,

form a backup channel, reducing dependence on limited destinations.

In this sense, the transaction itself cannot be evaluated as negative just because the other party is an Azerbaijani company.

Azerbaijan’s possible interest

At the same time, the interest of Azerbaijan should also be seen.

With this agreement, Azerbaijan can get additional transit flexibility, strengthen the communication capabilities of Nakhichevan and other destinations, as well as present its “digital corridor” and “regional hub” strategy from a stronger position.

In other words, this is not a story of one-sided interest. This is a process of mutual benefit on the one hand, and interdependence on the other.

The security issue

Traffic transit does not yet mean access to data content. With modern encryption, most internet content is protected.

But it does not eliminate all risks.

The transit operator can see or influence some technical level data: routes, IP addresses, traffic volumes, time patterns, and in some cases metadata.

Therefore, what is required here is not emotional noise, but a very clear security architecture.

The problem of transparency

At the moment, a number of key questions remain open in the public arena.

what are the boundary junction points

what bandwidth are you talking about

can the traffic of Armenian end consumers ever be directed through the territory of Azerbaijan,

which government agencies have assessed the security component of the transaction,

What control and protection mechanisms are provided?

These are not questions of excessive suspicion, but of responsible state thinking.

Overall rating

This agreement can be useful for Armenia if it serves to diversify channels, increase transit capacity of Armenia and does not create opaque or one-sided dependence on Azerbaijan.

But the same agreement can become risky if it is implemented without sufficient transparency, public accountability and explanation, as well as without measurable guarantees of national security.

Here, the most healthy approach is neither to reject the deal unequivocally, nor to welcome it unconditionally.

The most healthy approach is to demand clarification, control, technical security and state responsibility.

Because telecommunication transit is not only a business. It is critical infrastructure.

And in the case of Armenia and Azerbaijan, it is also a matter of national security.

Former SRC Chairman Davit Ananyan

—