A year after Armenia and Azerbaijan signed a provisional peace declaration in Washington, the gap between diplomatic momentum and implementation remains wide. The planned TRIPP corridor has moved into early surveying and investment planning, but its financing, security arrangements and operating rules are unresolved. The broader peace framework also remains unsigned.
TRIPP advances, with key terms still open
On August 8, the declaration’s anniversary, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio reaffirmed Washington’s commitment to the agreement. He said the declaration had ended decades of conflict and launched the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity,” adding that the United States had worked with Armenia and Azerbaijan over the past year to turn the agreement into progress.
Rubio pointed to the start of surveying for a railway across Armenian territory, intended to carry freight from Azerbaijan toward Turkey and beyond. He also cited the Trans-Caspian Enterprise Fund, which has initial capitalization of $201 million. Rubio described TRIPP as a link in the Trans-Caspian Trade Route and argued that commercial ties could help sustain peace.
Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev called the corridor’s potential “tremendous” in an August 8 letter to US President Donald Trump. Aliyev also said US-Azerbaijani relations had reached their highest point in 34 years of diplomatic ties. Trump spoke by phone with Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, expressing hope that construction would begin in the “near future.” Pashinyan said the project could help the two countries see each other “not as an obstacle, but … as neighbors.”
That public support hasn’t settled the questions that determine whether the corridor can be built and operated. The US role in security remains undefined, as do customs procedures for Azerbaijani people and goods using the planned road and railway. The project’s total cost and construction financing are also unclear. Armenian officials have sought additional investors, but have not secured firm commitments, according to previous reporting on TRIPP implementation.
The $201 million fund is a starting point, not a disclosed construction budget. Until the parties clarify responsibilities, costs and border procedures, the anniversary statements offer more evidence of political intent than of a settled delivery plan.
Iran adds uncertainty to the corridor’s prospects
The conflict between the United States and Iran is another uncertainty. The source reports that the war has absorbed US resources and attention, while Iranian leaders oppose TRIPP because they fear it could constrain Iran’s trade. The corridor is planned close to Armenia’s border with Iran. Whether Tehran can disrupt the project remains unclear.
At the same time, Armenia and Iran are discussing other trade and transport links. Iranian sources said officials from the two countries had developed a memorandum of understanding to streamline border crossings and open “parallel” trade corridors. The Tehran Times reported on July 31 that Armenian Deputy Infrastructure Minister Kristine Galachyan described transit infrastructure development as “on the right track.”
On the same date, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan met with an Iranian Foreign Ministry delegation in Yerevan. Armenia’s public readout did not mention TRIPP or specify whether the two sides shared a view of the project. It said only that officials had “underscored” opportunities created by new connectivity projects. The statement leaves open how Armenia will balance its plans for TRIPP with its trade and transport discussions with Iran.
The peace pact still depends on domestic politics
TRIPP is only one part of the unfinished agreement. Armenia and Azerbaijan have yet to finalize their provisional peace framework, and the source reports no sign that a signing ceremony is imminent. Baku has made a change to Armenia’s constitution a condition for signing, saying it must clearly recognize Azerbaijani sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh, which Azerbaijani forces regained control of in 2023.
Pashinyan’s government has signaled openness to constitutional change, but it may not have enough support to secure approval in parliament and among voters. His Civil Contract party won June’s parliamentary election, giving him a broad endorsement of his reform agenda, but fell short of a two-thirds majority. That leaves the path to a constitutional amendment politically uncertain.
Pashinyan has also proposed a national referendum on a draft constitution that could include provisions to help finalize a peace treaty. No draft amendments have been released for public discussion, and there is no timetable for a referendum. For now, TRIPP’s early technical steps coexist with unresolved commercial and political questions. The next meaningful measure of progress will be whether the parties convert their public commitments into clear financing, operating arrangements and a viable route to a signed peace pact.