“We will never, under any circumstances or at any cost, allow any ‘passage’ through the territory of Armenia that is not under our sovereignty. The topic of the ‘corridor’ is closed. We demand an end to all discussions based on a ‘corridor’ logic,” representatives of the Armenian authorities have been declaring this for over two years. In much the same way, they have insisted on Artsakh returning to the negotiation table, on Artsakh’s right to self-determination, the peaceful de-occupation of Shushi and Hadrut, and the rights and security of Artsakh’s citizens. However, it appears that these loud proclamations do not impose any moral obligations on the authorities: they can make bold statements, then do the opposite, and later use “clever” rhetorical tricks to justify why things turned out that way.
I believe we will see the same story unfold regarding the “corridor.” It seems likely that everything began after Shoigu’s visit to Baku, followed by Putin’s, where certain agreements were likely reached on this matter. Subsequently, Putin contacted Pashinyan, who, we must assume, gave a satisfactory response to the Russian president.
Following this, during a press conference, Pashinyan made some “reverancies” toward Russia and Putin (confounding pro-Western “courtiers”) and stated that if the route is opened, some private security service will inspect the cargo, not the Armenian border guards. At first glance, this seems to be done to avoid making the Azerbaijanis uncomfortable with our border guards checking their vehicles or, later on, their trains.
But the issue seems to run deeper. Regardless of what this “security service” is called, there are doubts that the road will actually be controlled by Russia, which has been that country’s goal for the past four years.
Read also
Otherwise, it is difficult to explain Iran’s strong reaction. The Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned the Russian ambassador in Tehran and expressed its opposition to the “corridor” plans and their “support by Russia.” It appears that Iran is more concerned about Armenia’s sovereignty than the Armenian leadership itself.
Aram Abrahamyan
