In an exclusive interview with Nicolas Tavitian for “Crossroads- Belgahay”, Dr Marat Terterov, Founder and Director of the Brussels Energy Club, and Co-founder of the European Geopolitical Forum, shared his analysis of the geopolitics of the Caucasus and of the European role in the region. They discussed the significance of US Vice-President J.D. Vance to Armenia and Azerbaijan, the prospects for peace between Armenia and its neighbours, the geopolitical balancing act that South Caucasus countries and other countries in Russia’s periphery must carry out to preserve their sovereignty and national security, Russia’s and Iran’s reactions to the US’s increased presence in Armenia and in the wider region, and the European strategy in the South Caucasus. In conclusion, he commented: “If you asked me what would the EU like to see in the South Caucasus, I’d tell you that they would like to bring Georgia back on the European accession path, to keep the energy partnership with Azerbaijan strong, and bring Armenia into a sort of pre-accession relationship. That might be part of a kind of a EU strategy towards the South Caucasus. But the biggest problem with that is the EU has never got its Russia strategy right. That’s not an easy task in our days whereas EU-Russia relations have gone to their lowest level ever”.

By Vasif HUSEYNOV, PhD, Head of Department, AIR Center, Adjunct Lecturer, ADA and Khazar Universities, Baku

U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance’s February 9–11 visit to Armenia and Azerbaijan marked a structural turning point in the South Caucasus. Unlike previous high-level engagements of the United States that generated rhetorical alignment but limited follow-through, this visit embedded the region into long-term American economic, technological, and strategic frameworks. Taking place on the heels of the latest agreement (January 14) between Washington and Yerevan on the implementation framework for the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), the visit served to consolidate the American influence in the region and taking it to higher levels. The consequences are unfolding along two axes: domestically, within Armenia and Azerbaijan’s political economies; and geopolitically, in the region’s recalibrating balance between the United States and Russia, with Georgia seeking entry into the new configuration. READ MORE

By Vusal GULIYEV, Leading Advisor at the Baku-based Center of Analysis of International Relations (AIR Center)

On January 29, construction formally commenced on a new high-voltage transmission system led by Azer Enerji. The project, known as the “Zangezur Energy Corridor,” will integrate Azerbaijan’s Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic into Baku’s national power grid via the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), also known as the Zangezur Corridor. The project will also establish the technical foundations for a future Azerbaijan–Türkiye–Europe electricity corridor. This initiative is one part of Baku’s push to strengthen its role in transregional electricity connectivity, which favours corridor development over isolated infrastructure investment. The launch of the Zangezur Energy Corridor positions Azerbaijan as a regional electricity hub linking Asia and Europe. READ MORE

By Yeghia TASHJIAN, Beirut-based regional analyst and researcher, columnist, "The Armenian Weekly”

China’s position on the TRIPP (Trump’s Route for International Peace and Prosperity) has been cautious and low-profile, shaped less by enthusiasm for the project itself than by Beijing’s overall policy toward the South Caucasus and the region’s geopolitical rivalries. From China’s perspective, TRIPP is not mutually exclusive with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). From the U.S. perspective, however, the project carries geopolitical weight, aimed at containing or counterbalancing Russian, Iranian and Chinese influence in Eurasia.
China has evaluated TRIPP primarily through the lens of risk management, given that the route traverses border regions historically vulnerable to conflict and border tensions and lies at the intersection of regional rivalries. This helps explain why Beijing has avoided any public endorsement, opting instead for rhetorical neutrality and a wait-and-see approach — signalling that economic connectivity must be inclusive, territorial integrity respected, trade depoliticized and cooperation insulated from zero-sum geopolitical competition. READ MORE

By Aytaс MAHAMMADOVA, Energy Security Expert affiliated with the Caspian-Alpine Society

The South Caucasus has long occupied an ambiguous place in American foreign policy, neither central to U.S. national security nor irrelevant to it. The region has historically mattered insofar as it intersected with larger geopolitical contests: between Russia and the West, between energy producers and consumers, and between stability and fragmentation along Eurasia's inner frontier. The 2025 U.S. National Security Strategy codifies a shift that will sharpen this logic, moving the United States decisively away from expansive regional engagement toward selective, interest-driven involvement. While the document does not explicitly address the South Caucasus in its regional sections, its underlying principles, such as restraint, burden-sharing, transactional-ism, and rejection of transformational agendas, will fundamentally reshape Washington's engagement with the South Caucasus states. This recalibration reflects broader strategic realities: finite American resources, diminished appetite for open-ended commitments, and recognition that regional outcomes will ultimately be determined by local power dynamics rather than external patronage. READ MORE

By Fuad Shahbazov, Baku-based independent regional security and defence analyst

The 12-day Israel-Iran war revealed new vulnerabilities in the Islamic Republic and increased tensions between Iran and its neighbour, Azerbaijan. In the aftermath of the strategic setback to Iranian nuclear and military facilities, Iran’s conservative political and security establishment began shifting focus toward perceived “close enemies” said to be complicit in the Israeli attacks. Among the primary targets of this narrative has been Iran’s northern neighbor, Azerbaijan, which Iranian state-run media and channels affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) accused of providing “intelligence support to Israel” during the strikes on nuclear, military, and civilian sites. While Azerbaijani officials categorically denied any involvement in Israeli military operations and the Iranian government did not present concrete evidence supporting its claims, the media campaign renewed tensions between Tehran and Baku, undermining a period of cautious diplomatic stability that had followed earlier disputes over Armenia and other issues. Indeed, the Iranian criticism of a growing Azerbaijan-Israel alliance is not a new phenomenon and Azerbaijan’s ties with Israel have long been a source of discontent in Azerbaijan-Iran relations. READ MORE

By Benyamin POGHOSYAN, PhD, Senior Research Fellow at the APRI Armenia
Lara SETRAKIAN, President, APRI Armenia

Political scientists and wider civil society from Armenia and Azerbaijan don’t often see eye to eye. After decades of war between the two countries their grievances run deep, with each side blaming the other for continued rounds of conflict. But experts in Yerevan and Baku can now agree on one thing: the meeting held in Abu Dhabi on July 10 between their heads of government was a moment of respite for the South Caucasus. After months without a major meeting between the two sides (the leaders met briefly at the margins of the European Political Community summit in Tirana in May), Abu Dhabi was able to host their most comprehensive gathering in known history, attended by representatives who cover all key aspects of the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process. Still, expectations should be managed. The two sides may yet be very far from signing a peace agreement, though a draft was announced earlier this year. There are thorny issues, like border demarcation, that remain unresolved. And there are competing visions for how the future of transport links should evolve. Nonetheless, the Abu Dhabi meeting has revived the diplomatic track, giving new hope for peace and stability, while calming fears of an imminent outbreak of war. READ MORE

Bakhram Sotiboldiev,
Head of the Department of the Institute for Strategic and Regional Studies under the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan

In today's rapidly changing world, Uzbekistan confidently positions itself as one of the key players on the international stage. The country’s foreign policy, reinvigorated with the election of Shavkat Mirziyoyev as President in 2016, demonstrates impressive results, transforming the republic into a significant center for regional and global diplomacy. READ MORE