About the Roundtable "Political and legal consequences of the Washington Declaration. The importance and prospects of the Kazakhstan dialogue platform".

A Roundtable on this topic was held in Yerevan on 14.10.2025. It became a continuation of the Roundtable organized by the International Center for Geopolitical Forecasting "East-West" in late September in Astana on the topic: "Kazakhstan dialogue platform: a new stage of Armenian-Azerbaijani cooperation".

The objectives of the Yerevan Roundtable were:

• Expert analysis of key issues of the Declaration signed in August 2025 at the White House, identification of problems "hidden" in the subtext of the Declaration, their political and legal consequences, and ways to solve them.

• Preparation of proposals for all interested parties – for government agencies, the expert community, and international organizations.

• To outline and coordinate with Kazakh colleagues further steps for the effective use of the Kazakh Dialogue Platform as an instrument of regional diplomacy.

Opening the round table, Larisa Alaverdyan, First Ombudsman of the Republic of Armenia (RA), noted the importance of the initiative of her Kazakh colleagues, who responded to the call of Kazakh President Tokayev to learn from the past and strive for a constructive and open dialogue. Such a dialogue is important for Armenia and Azerbaijan, but its importance is not limited only to these two countries.

Chairman of the Board of the Armenian Association of Political Scientists, Mihran Shahzadeyan, in his keynote speech, noted that the Declaration adopted following the meeting in Washington could be called an agreement of intent to ensure peaceful coexistence between the two countries. But if we talk not about the declared, but about the real intentions, then the following questions arise. How does this fit in with a significant increase in Azerbaijan's military budget, while the Armenian authorities intend to reduce their own? How should we react to the fact that in 2024, that is, during the period when the text of the treaty on peaceful coexistence was agreed upon with the Armenian authorities, more than 25 military exercises were held in Azerbaijan?

In this regard, it can be noted that the only real, key element of the agreement, the exception in the Declaration is the third paragraph, which addresses the infrastructural issues of the region, namely the corridor that should connect Azerbaijan with its Nakhichevan exclave and dubbed the "Trump Way." But for some reason, Aliyev very soon forgot this name and constantly continues to call it the "Zangezur Corridor." The Declaration is an official international legal document. The cross-border route runs through the territory of the Syunik region of the Republic of Armenia, which means that the Azerbaijani side is obliged to adhere to the legally binding name. Moreover, Azerbaijan has recently made direct territorial claims against Armenia, calling most of its territory, including the capital Yerevan, "Western Azerbaijan" and the Syunik region "Western Zangezur." And it still occupies more than 240 square kilometers of the sovereign territory of Armenia.

When considering infrastructure issues, both geopolitical and, if I may say so, geo-economic problems come to the fore. The corridor specified in paragraph 3 of the Agreement is not just a link between Azerbaijan and its autonomy, but a communication project linking Turkey with Azerbaijan and Central Asia, and further with China, as well as the East with Europe and the Arab countries.

Here are some of these issues.

1. How will the implementation of this project affect the functioning of other cross-border communications? Such as, for example, the North-South International Transport Corridor and the Chabahar–Central Asia corridor, the China-Pakistan Corridor (KPEC, Gwadar).

2. What will be the role and format of the US presence in this case, and how will countries such as Iran and Russia react? Is a confrontational scenario of a showdown between the leading players possible?

3. The issue of the threat of this cross-border transport communication becoming an extraterritorial corridor is being raised very seriously. Should Armenia have the right to carry out customs and passport control? If so, will it be real or simulated under the guise of some kind of online information technology? 

4. Why is the Baku—Gazakh—Ijevan—Dilijan—Yerevan route not being considered, with subsequent access through Ararat to the Nakhichevan Autonomous Region and Turkey?

5. Will Armenia receive the opportunity of transport communication through the territory of Azerbaijan with its economic partners, transport links, as well as mutually beneficial transport routes serving Armenia!

6. Armenia, as well as Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Belarus are members of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Whether establishing control over the corridor in one form or another by the Americans will be a violation of the EAEU Charter, whether the free movement of goods and services within the EAEU will be limited? Will the requirements of the EAEU Customs Code be met? If not, will this force the EAEU members, including Russia and Kazakhstan, to reconsider the prospects of using this section for the transit of their goods?  Will Armenia have to choose between partnership with the United States and membership in the EAEU?  

7. How will the free trade zone between the EAEU and Iran operating through the territory of Armenia work?

8. How will the positions of the Russian Federation related to the railway concession, as well as the presence of Russian border guards in the area of the Meghri section, be respected?

Today, there are more questions about these and other issues than there are specific answers. Maybe that's why, along with enthusiastic cheers, there are also skeptical assessments. Voices are becoming louder in Russia and Iran that the "Trump Way" could cut off Armenia and Russia from Iran and that in the future it will cause a serious conflict in the region. Attempts to change the territorial link of Armenia with Iran are considered a "red line" for these countries. This situation is characterized by high uncertainty and risks of making decisions that could create serious conflict. The region may turn into a nerve center for the clash of geopolitical interests of Turkey, Iran, Russia, China, Western and other countries.

Therefore, to address cross-border communications issues it is important to ensure the proper interaction of law and politics. The legal issues of cross-border communications and transit regimes have long been an integral part of international law and the international community has made a lot of effort to establish a solid legal framework for it.  And all other international documents on the legal regulation of cross-border communications for the transportation of goods and passengers unequivocally recognize the sovereign rights of the transit country and the validity of its jurisdiction without mentioning any extraterritorial status. This is also stated in paragraph 9 of the Yalta Memorandum on Cooperation between the CIS member States in the Field of International Transport Corridors dated September 18, 2003.

The important aspect of ensuring the security of cross-border routes, such as countering organized crime, should be particularly noted. The provisions of the UN Convention against Organized Transnational Crime should be followed and they states: "Nothing gives a State Party the right to exercise jurisdiction and functions on the territory of another State that fall solely within the competence of the authorities of that other State in accordance with its domestic legislation."

In Armenia both the government and the opposition propose a peaceful agenda taking into account the provisions of international law and the interests of the peoples of both countries. The authorities and the political elite of Azerbaijan should also move away from the policy of forcefully pushing their agenda, attempts to push through solutions in an extraterritorial format.  The Kazakhstan dialogue platform will help the parties to focus their efforts on solving problems on a solid legal basis. Not only Armenia and Azerbaijan will benefit from this, but also all other interested parties who can also present their vision on this platform.

Reports and presentations by some other participants of the Roundtable are attached.

Armenian Association of Political Scientists. aapscinfo@gmail.com