Assessing Armenian-Azerbaijani peace deal one year later

US President Donald Trump, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev (left) and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan show their signed copies of the joint peace declaration at the White House on August 8, 2025. (Photo: White House)

One year after the signing of a provisional peace deal in Washington, DC, American, Armenian and Azerbaijani officials continue to exude optimism about the potential for stability and prosperity in the South Caucasus. But movement toward implementing the joint declaration has been halting. 

On August 8, the one-year anniversary of the declaration’s signing by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani leader Ilham Aliyev, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a statement reaffirming Washington’s commitment to realizing the deal’s potential.

“This declaration ended decades of conflict in the South Caucasus and launched the trailblazing Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity –TRIPP,” Rubio stated. “Over the past twelve months, the United States has worked side-by-side with Armenia and Azerbaijan to turn that promise into progress.”

Rubio touted several TRIPP-related accomplishments, including the start of surveying work for a railway that would traverse Armenian territory to facilitate freight traffic from Azerbaijan to Turkey and beyond, as well as the establishment of a Trans-Caspian Enterprise Fund with initial capitalization of $201 million.

“This progress reflects a simple truth: peace and prosperity reinforce one another.” Rubio stated. “TRIPP is more than an infrastructure project – it is a vital link in the Trans-Caspian Trade Route, a driver of commercial opportunities for the United States and others, and a model for how economic cooperation can cement peace following the resolution of long-standing disputes.” 

Aliyev, in an August 8 letter addressed to Trump, lauded TRIPP’s “tremendous potential,” while noting that bilateral US-Azerbaijani relations “have now reached their highest point in the 34-year history of our diplomatic relations.”

Trump held upbeat phone conversations with both Pashinyan and Aliyev, reiterating a desire for TRIPP’s construction to start in the “near future.” Pashinyan in a statement said TRIPP has the potential to “help Armenia and Azerbaijan begin to perceive each other not as an obstacle, but … as neighbors.”

There is no disputing that enthusiasm for the deal remains strong. All sides want it to happen. Even so, many key operational details concerning TRIPP remain to be worked out, including the US role in ensuring the route’s security, as well as potential customs procedures for Azerbaijani individuals and goods using the planned road and railway. And despite the Enterprise Fund’s existence, questions linger about TRIPP’s price tag and financing for construction. Armenian officials this year have sought to attract additional investors in the project, but have yet to receive any firm commitments. 

A wild card concerning TRIPP’s future is the ongoing war between the United States and Iran. That conflict has drained the US of financial resources and distracted the Trump Administration. Iranian leaders, meanwhile, are steadfastly opposed to TRIPP, worried that it will impede Tehran’s own ability to trade. Whether Iran has the geopolitical muscle to disrupt TRIPP’s development, however, is an open question. The envisioned TRIPP corridor would sit not far north from the Armenian-Iranian border.

Armenian and Iranian officials met recently in Tehran to discuss trade and transport. According to Iranian sources, the two sides developed a memorandum of understanding to make border-crossing procedures more efficient and open “parallel” trade corridors in the region. A report published July 31 by the Tehran Times quoted Armenian Deputy Infrastructure Minister Kristine Galachyan as saying “the development of transit infrastructure is on the right track.” 

Meanwhile, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan met with an Iranian Foreign Ministry delegation in Yerevan on July 31 to review issues of bilateral concern. An official Armenian readout of the discussion stuck to generalities and did not contain any specific references to TRIPP. It also provided no indication that the views of the two countries are aligned, stating simply that “the importance of the opportunities created by the implementation of new connectivity projects was underscored.”

Beyond TRIPP, the provisional peace framework between Armenia and Azerbaijan has yet to be finalized and there is no indication that a signing ceremony will be held anytime soon. Azerbaijan has set a precondition for sealing a peace pact: Armenia must amend its constitution to unequivocally recognize Baku’s sovereignty over the Nagorno-Karabakh territory, which Azerbaijani forces regained control of in 2023.

Pashinyan’s administration has hinted that it is amenable to such a change, but it is uncertain whether it has sufficient political capital to secure parliamentary and public approval for an amendment. Pashinyan secured a convincing victory in June’s parliamentary election, receiving a general endorsement of his reform agenda. But his Civil Contract party failed to obtain a two-thirds majority of parliamentary seats that would ensure adoption of an amendment. 

In addition, Pashinyan has announced plans to hold a national referendum on a draft of a new constitution, which would presumably contain provisions to facilitate the finalization of a peace treaty with Azerbaijan. But to date, no proposed amendments have been circulated for public discussion and there is no timeframe for the holding of a referendum.

—