The most widely discussed topic these days continues to be the war involving the US and Iran and its future. There are different views on what the region and the world will look like after the end of this war. One thing is clear: nothing will remain as it was before, and serious realignments will take place in the region regardless of the outcome.
It is evident that a change of power has not occurred in Tehran, and there appears to be no significant internal disturbances; therefore, a change of government does not seem likely at this point. Yes, Iran’s key infrastructure has been damaged, but this still does not mean the war is over, as aerial attacks are continuing. However, what is important for Armenia is not only what will happen with Iran itself, but also what will happen in Iran’s neighboring countries and what developments may occur in the Trump scenario.
The most important question that should concern Armenia is what will happen to Iran and its policy in the South Caucasus after the war ends. We also need to understand what policy the United States is pursuing toward Iran, because the information coming from Washington is highly contradictory. It is still unclear what approaches the Trump administration has on this issue, since President Donald Trump himself periodically makes a variety of statements about ending the war, possible negotiations with Iran, and other developments which sometimes contradict each other.
From Armenia’s perspective it is also very important to understand what future the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP) will have after the end of the US–Iran war, since one of the main objectives of the TRIPP approach was to exert influence along Iran’s external borders. Another goal of this approach was to enable the routing of energy resources in a way that would bypass Iran, allowing them to be transported from Central Asia to the South Caucasus and via Turkey to Europe. TRIPP could also provide an alternative route for Azerbaijan to bypass Iran while connecting with its enclave Nakhijevan, which would make Azerbaijan less dependent on Iran.
All this makes it crucial for Armenia to understand, in the event of continued US–Iran tensions, what the American presence within the TRIPP project would look like, including possible security provision by private US organizations. Would such actors be regarded by Iran as legitimate targets in the event of future escalation, and if so, which possible types of actions might be taken against them?
In recent days, we have seen that Iran’s targets have included not only military but also economic assets, with the intention of striking at US economic interests in neighboring countries. Consequently, the TRIPP, located just a few hundred meters from Iran’s border, could potentially become a target for Iran under conditions of heightened escalation – or for any other reason.
