Speaking to Russian state television at the end of a Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) summit in Moscow, Overchuk did not deny that Armenia is opposed to such participation. He implied that Yerevan froze more than a year ago the work of a Russian-Armenian-Azerbaijani working group dealing with the practical modalities of Armenian-Azerbaijani transport links.
The group was tasked with implementing Paragraph 9 of a Russian-brokered ceasefire agreement that stopped the 2020 war in Nagorno-Karabakh. The clause commits Yerevan to opening transport corridor that would connect Azerbaijan to its Nakhichevan exclave through Armenia’s Syunik province. It also stipulates that Russian border guards will “control” the movement of people, vehicles and goods there.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused the Armenian side in August of “sabotaging” this arrangement. Armenian officials rejected the accusation that added to heightened tensions between Moscow and Yerevan.
They maintain that the 2020 agreement does not entitle the Russians to escorting traffic to and from Nakhichevan, let alone be involved in Armenian border controls. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian reaffirmed this stance in a speech at the CIS summit.
“All claims that Armenia agreed in any form to let third countries ensure the security of communications on its sovereign territory or that any document provides for such a thing are simply not true,” said Pashinian. “Ensuring security on its territory is a sovereign obligation of any country.”
Visiting Armenia last month, Overchuk insisted that Moscow believes transit routes passing through the South Caucasus country must not undermine its territorial integrity. The Russian vice-premier co-chairs the trilateral task force together with his Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts.
Armenia - A Russian border guard checkpoint outside a border village in Syunik province, May13, 2024.
“This topic is of particular importance to Russia now because after they left Nagorno-Karabakh control over that communication route or presence there seems to be one of its few levers against Armenia and Azerbaijan,” said Tigran Grigorian, an Armenian political analyst.
In Grigorian’s words, Azerbaijan does not object to Russian control of what it calls “the Zangezur corridor” but would also not mind a different, “non-Russian” presence there which would “limit Armenia’s control of that transit route.” He said that “at the suggestion of the United States” the Armenian government has been considering outsourcing border and customs administration to a foreign company.
“But the problem with this variant is the principle of reciprocity … Azerbaijan wants unilateral solutions whereby that private company would operate only on Armenian territory,” Grigorian told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service.
Pashinian said on August 31 that his government is ready to let a foreign company provide “additional security” along the would-be transport links for Nakhichevan. His foreign minister, Ararat Mirzoyan, clarified afterwards that the company would “escort passengers or cargo,” rather than replace Armenian border and customs officers. The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry indicated that such an arrangement would not satisfy Baku.