TEHRAN – On Friday, Armenia and Azerbaijan signed an agreement at the White House, in the presence of U.S. President Donald Trump, granting Washington exclusive rights to develop a corridor through Armenia’s southern Syunik province, which borders Iran.

The project is called the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), and aims to traverse Armenian land, establishing a direct link between Azerbaijan and its Nakhchivan exclave, and subsequently to Turkey.

For almost 40 years, Armenia and Azerbaijan have been locked in a fierce conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. The region, which was mainly inhabited by Armenians during the Soviet era but is situated within Azerbaijan's borders, has been the center of numerous wars, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths and displacing many others. Attempts at international mediation, including those by the OSCE Minsk Group, have not succeeded in reaching a sustainable resolution.

Now, Trump’s involvement, which comes amid his open pursuit of a legacy as a global peacemaker and perhaps a Nobel Peace Prize, may have deeper strategic implications rather than just a step toward regional peace.

The U.S. has a long history of reshaping foreign regions in ways that ultimately serve its own geopolitical objectives. From West to Central Asia, American “mediation” has too often been a prelude to fragmentation and conflict.

Washington's latest maneuver in the South Caucasus is all too similar to the interventions that shattered Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan. In each case, the U.S. posed as the stabilizing force and left behind wrecked states, ethnic divisions, and vacuums filled by the extremists.

In Iraq, the entire state structure was dismantled during the 2003 invasion, thus throwing the country into chaos and creating conditions for terrorism. The sectarian political system imposed by the United States heightened divisions, shattering Iraq, while it remained subject to endless cycles of violence.

Libya, once the richest country in Africa, was plunged into a decade of civil war following the 2011 NATO intervention. The ouster of Gaddafi, which the West hailed as a victory for democracy, instead created rival governments, re-established slavery, and set up jihadist strongholds.

In Syria, U.S. funding and arming of anti-Assad rebels under programs like Timber Sycamore ultimately bolstered extremist groups, deepened ethnic tensions, and left the country partitioned and shattered.

Even in Afghanistan, after two decades of occupation and $2 trillion spent, the U.S. withdrawal in 2021 returned the Taliban to power in mere days. The U.S.-trained military collapsed almost instantly, highlighting the futility of trying to engineer nations through foreign designs.

The U.S. now seems set to replicate these patterns in the Caucasus. By pulling the strings behind the Armenia–Azerbaijan declaration and dissolving the OSCE Minsk Group, which is the only internationally recognized framework with decades of institutional memory, Washington has removed the only established mechanisms for the resolution of conflicts concerning Armenia. This abrupt dismantling, reminiscent of institutional collapse in Iraq after 2003, has left unresolved issues such as border demarcation and minority rights without any credible multilateral forum.

The TRIPP corridor itself raises serious sovereignty concerns. The vague promise of “unimpeded connectivity” through Armenian territory risks undermining Armenia’s control over its own land. The deliberate exclusion of Iran and Russia from discussions signals an attempt to redraw the region’s economic geography in a way that sidelines traditional partners and favors U.S. influence.

At the same time, not only has Washington engaged more closely in providing security to Azerbaijan, which is about $164 million in militarily assistance, but also it has rendered further ground for questioning whether or not Washington could be neutral enough to act as a mediator. The U.S. has begun giving one side military assistance and thereby risks tipping the balance in the region whereby one such tip would encourage Baku to assume more aggressive poses. As a result, Armenia might ask for new security guarantees from other powers, which in turn would further inflame tensions and instigate an arms race.

The U.S. economic vision for the region seems co-equal paralleled. Diversion of trade and energy flows toward Western markets while deliberately excluding Iran's North-South Transport Corridor has a potential of creating an economic fragmentation. This exclusionary approach undermines the interconnections for trade systems benefiting all regional players because it tends toward creating dependencies that could be used for political pressure- a technique Washington has used so effectively elsewhere.

Iran has made clear its opposition to externally imposed corridors and unilateral agreements that disregard regional realities. On Saturday, Senior Adviser to the Leader of the Islamic Revolution on International Affairs, Ali Akbar Velayati, stressed that the Islamic Republic will act decisively to safeguard the stability and security of the South Caucasus — “with or without Russia.”

“This corridor will not become a passage owned by Trump, but rather a graveyard for Trump’s mercenaries,” Velayati declared.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry also issued a statement welcoming the Armenia–Azerbaijan peace deal as “an important step toward lasting stability,” but warned of the dangers posed by foreign interference. Tehran reaffirmed its readiness to work with both Yerevan and Baku through inclusive formats such as the 3+3 Regional Cooperation Platform, which brings together Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Russia, and Turkey.

Iran regards regional connectivity as a desirable aim only if it respects national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the interests of all concerned. Tehran has often stressed that Western designs have involved extending influence from the Caucasus into Central Asia with the intention of isolating Iran and Russia and controlling smaller states.

Moscow, too, has voiced concern over outside interference. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova on Saturday reiterated the need for normalization between Azerbaijan and Armenia “based on mutual interests and without interference from outside powers.” She stressed that Russia’s goal is a “stable and prosperous region” achieved through “comprehensive normalization” that takes into account the interests of the peoples of both countries.

Peace initiatives must be inclusive for stability to be long-lasting in the South Caucasus and regionally driven in terms of sovereignty of countries involved. No outside power with a destabilizing history can now be allowed to dictate the future of the region.

The current U.S. strategy-dismantling established diplomacy, isolating the most significant players in the region, and militarizing one side of the dispute-is at risk of duplicating the tragedies of Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan. Without recalibrating priorities from domination to cooperation, the TRIPP corridor promises to become one more flashpoint in a region already choked with decades of unresolved conflict.