Former Armenian PM, opposition commentators allege Israeli influence over US-backed TRIPP route amid growing tensions between Yerevan and Moscow.
Aryeh Lightstone, senior advisor to the Board of Peace, and Steve Witkoff, US President Donald Trump’s Special Envoy, during a meeting about the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), n the sidelines of the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York, US, September 23, 2026(photo credit: REUTERS/BING GUAN)As Armenia and Azerbaijan move ahead with plans for a US-backed transport corridor championed by President Donald Trump, pro-Russian political figures and Armenian opposition commentators are portraying the project as serving hidden Jewish and Israeli interests, reviving antisemitic conspiracy narratives amid deteriorating relations between Yerevan and Moscow.
The accusations have taken on renewed significance following Armenia’s ratification of the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), a strategic transport project connecting mainland Azerbaijan with its Nakhchivan exclave through southern Armenia, near the Iranian border.
On Thursday, November 5, the Armenian government proposed an extraordinary parliamentary session for November 12 to consider legislation facilitating the establishment of the joint Armenian-American company responsible for implementing the project. The move follows the Armenian parliament’s October 28 ratification of the TRIPP agreement by 63 votes to 32, with opposition lawmakers voting against it.While opponents have raised concerns over Armenian sovereignty, relations with Iran and growing dependence on Washington, several prominent voices have gone further, suggesting that the initiative is controlled by Jewish or Israeli interests.
US President Donald Trump speaks with members of the media on the day the final steel beam goes into the ballroom, at the White House in Washington, DC, US, November 4, 2026. (credit: REUTERS/Evan Vucci)Harutyunyan argued that the real objective was to bring Armenia’s southern Syunik province under foreign economic and eventually military influence, rather than promote regional peace. He returned to similar themes in subsequent interviews.
In an October 30 statement published by 168.am, Khachikyan claimed that the company’s owners were members of the Israeli lobby with interests in Israel and ties to Azerbaijan. On November 4, in remarks published by Goris Times, he linked the initiative to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and suggested that control over the strategically important Meghri area would ultimately pass to interests associated with Israel and Azerbaijan.
What the agreement says
The official agreement does not support those ownership claims. It provides for a 74% American stake and a 26% Armenian stake in a development company incorporated in Armenia. The American shareholder is to be wholly owned by the US International Development Finance Corporation, a government agency.The agreement grants the company substantial commercial powers, including a role in selecting contractors and operators, and provides for certain exceptions to Armenian legislation. But it also explicitly recognizes Armenia’s sovereignty and jurisdiction over the project area. Nothing in the published agreement establishes control by Israel, Kushner or a Jewish lobby.Other commentators have sought to connect Armenia’s future to Israel’s relationship with Azerbaijan.Political analyst Vigen Hakobyan, speaking to 168TV, suggested that Azerbaijan had obligations to Israel extending beyond military cooperation, and pointed to the influence of a powerful lobby in Washington, including over the Trump administration.Andranik Hovhannisyan, an international relations commentator appearing on opposition outlet LIVEnews.am, warned that Azerbaijan and Turkey sought to weaken Armenia into a failed state, drawing a comparison with the position of Palestinians in relation to Israel.More sweeping conspiracy claims came from political commentator Tiran Lokmagozian, who alleged in an interview with Lratvakan Radio that Israel had received control over Karabakh as payment for its military assistance to Azerbaijan during the 2020 war.Lokmagozian claimed that Israeli intelligence personnel and military forces were operating there and that airports had been constructed for Israeli aircraft to conduct operations against Iran. He also asserted that Azerbaijanis were not being resettled in the area.No credible evidence was presented to establish that Israel controls Karabakh or operates military bases there. His assertion about the absence of Azerbaijani resettlement also conflicts with reports of residents returning to the region.Tigran Kocharyan, editor-in-chief of Alpha News, suggested that Israel was preparing possible operations against Iran from Azerbaijani territory. He claimed that restrictions on hijabs in Azerbaijani schools could be used to identify and neutralize pro-Iranian elements, describing the process as an operation supported by Israel.Kocharyan also participated in an October 30 roundtable on Russian-Armenian relations in Moscow, where he criticized Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s approach to Russia. According to the Russian newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets, he accused the Armenian government of expecting Moscow to finance its European integration while continuing to benefit from Russian support.
The Israel-Azerbaijan arms trade
The actual defense relationship between Israel and Azerbaijan has provided fertile ground for these accusations.On October 19, Horizon Weekly, the Canadian publication associated with the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, reported a $235 million Israeli arms deal with Azerbaijan. Israeli company Elbit Systems confirmed the contract but did not publicly identify Azerbaijan as the customer, which was named in Israeli media reports.The publication criticized Israel’s role as a major arms supplier to Azerbaijan and the use of Israeli weapons in previous fighting. Such criticism concerns an established military relationship and is distinct from allegations of hidden Jewish control over regional developments.The broader political confrontation was on display at the October 30 Moscow meeting, where Russian State Duma member Konstantin Zatulin criticized both Moscow’s failure to do more to protect Armenia in the past and Pashinyan’s increasingly Western-oriented policies.Russian political scientist Andranik Migranyan warned that Armenia’s statehood was at risk, arguing that separation from Russia would leave the country exposed to outside powers. He questioned whether Armenians would retain meaningful control over TRIPP under American management.Those tensions have since intensified. On November 4, Russia proposed restricting Armenia’s voting and appointment rights in the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), citing unpaid membership contributions. Armenia froze its participation in the alliance in 2024. On Thursday, Pashinyan reiterated that his country’s interests in the organization had been exhausted.The use of antisemitic conspiracy narratives in Armenian political discourse is not new.US State Department reports on religious freedom in Armenia for 2022 and 2023 documented the circulation of antisemitic theories by fringe groups and Russia-affiliated bloggers. Some portrayed the loss of Karabakh as part of a global Jewish-Turkish conspiracy.The 2023 report also described antisemitic publications targeting Jewish community representatives, including allegations that a community leader worked for Israeli intelligence. Attacks on a synagogue in Yerevan were also documented, although Jewish community representatives cautioned that they appeared to involve outside provocations rather than widespread antisemitism in Armenian society.There is no publicly established evidence that Moscow directed the specific statements about TRIPP. Nevertheless, the recurring references to supposed Jewish projects, Israeli influence and powerful lobbies echo conspiracy narratives previously documented among Russia-affiliated voices.Armenia faces difficult questions over sovereignty, security and its future relations with Russia, Iran and the West. Those questions warrant serious public scrutiny. But introducing allegations of hidden Jewish control into that debate risks replacing an examination of political decisions with scapegoating, undermining public institutions and exposing the Jewish minority to hostility.For a country seeking to strengthen its democratic institutions and build closer ties with Western partners, such narratives could ultimately weaken the very sovereignty their proponents claim to defend.
—