In The Grand Chessboard, Zbigniew Brzezinski referred to Azerbaijan as “the vitally important ‘cork’ in the bottle containing the riches of the Caspian Sea basin and Central Asia.” His metaphor, laden with imperialist overtones, clearly captures Azerbaijan’s strategic value as a gateway to vast energy and mineral resources.
During the Cold War, the Caucasus was virtually beyond the reach of Western maneuvering, but after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, this region reemerged as a contested space.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Azerbaijan pursued a foreign policy of strategic equidistance. However, as global and regional competition for geopolitical, economic, and cultural dominance intensified, all countries in the South Caucasus became targets of Western influence operations. The aim of these operations was to eradicate the Soviet and Russian legacy in the region and drastically disrupt these countries’ relations with Moscow.
Influence is exerted through multiple vectors: Investments, trade, energy agreements, market access and financial aid, control of energy resources, pipelines and supply routes, defense agreements, arms sales and security alliances, soft cultural power, educational and religious ties, institutional reforms, integration into regional and international organizations, psychological operations, and media campaigns that increasingly rely on social media. But influence becomes hegemonic when it shifts from episodic to systemic and structural, that is, when it captures the political, economic, and cultural elites of the countries in the region.
The role of the US: The Zangezur Corridor
The establishment of the Zangezur Corridor under US administration did not arise in a political vacuum, but as the result of a meticulously orchestrated campaign to displace Russian influence in the South Caucasus.
Nikol Pashinyan, who came to power in Armenia in 2018 through the so-called “Velvet Revolution,” has become Washington’s main instrument for reorienting Armenian foreign policy away from Russia. Pashinyan’s loss of popular legitimacy has been documented by multiple opinion polls. However, the continued hold on power of a leader who has long since ceased to represent his people suggests the existence of external support mechanisms.
In Azerbaijan, the strategy of distancing itself from Russia has followed different but equally effective patterns. The systematic persecution of Russian media outlets has eliminated important channels of Russian informational influence in the Azerbaijani media space. This campaign against Russian media has been coordinated with restrictions on NGOs, cultural organizations, and educational platforms linked to Moscow.
Analysis of the events leading up to the Zangezur Corridor agreement reveals the characteristics of a multinational intelligence operation designed specifically to create the geopolitical conditions necessary for Russian displacement.
On August 8, 2025, Washington became the epicenter of a geopolitical reconfiguration of extraordinary magnitude when Armenia and Azerbaijan signed the agreement to create the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” (TRIPP).
The 42-kilometer-long territory will be called the “Trump Bridge.” This corridor, which would be under U.S. administration for a period of 99 years, represents much more than a simple trade route: it is the materialization of a geopolitical strategy that could fundamentally alter the balance of power in the post-Soviet space.
In other words, it is not just a tactical maneuver: it is a strategic repositioning. From Washington’s perspective, securing a presence in Zangezur serves multiple objectives: eroding the remnants of Russian influence in the post-Soviet space, provoking Iran, and—perhaps most crucially—undermining China’s Belt and Road Initiative by disrupting the Middle Corridor of the New Silk Road and thus a direct attack on the economic foundations of the emerging multipolar order.
Washington’s control of it aims to simultaneously weaken two of the strategic axes of connectivity that sustain Eurasian projection: the Belt and Road Initiative promoted by China and the North-South Transport Corridor promoted by Russia, India, and Iran.
The North-South Transport Corridor, a key link connecting India with Europe via Iran and Russia, is also in the crosshairs. The US presence in Zangezur could divert trade and make Eurasian routes more expensive, undermining their competitiveness and weakening the Moscow-Tehran-New Delhi axis, designed to escape Western logistical and financial hegemony.
Influence of the United Kingdom
When analyzing Azerbaijan, it is impossible not to notice the British influence: the United Kingdom is the largest investor in the Azerbaijani economy.More than 450 British companies operate in Azerbaijan. Over the past 33 years, BP, together with its partners, has invested more than $87 billion in oil and gas exploration, development, and transportation projects in Azerbaijan.
BP, Azerbaijan’s largest investor, plays a role that goes far beyond the economy. The energy giant is deeply involved in the country’s politics and society, both through its outreach organizations and initiatives and through its collaboration with Azerbaijani universities and various ministries, including the Ministry of Education. BP has always maintained close ties with Britain’s MI6 and Ministry of Defense. Among the senior officials who became BP advisors are former MI6 chief Sir John Sawers, who joined the corporation as a non-executive director; its former head of counterterrorism, Sir Mark Allen, who joined BP after leaving government service; General Nick Houghton, former Chief of the Defense Staff; and Lord George Robertson, former Secretary of State for Defense and Secretary General of NATO, also became BP advisers.
The UK has played a central, albeit discreet, role in its support for Baku. Britain sees Azerbaijan as an energy alternative to Russia and has worked to make the Southern Gas Corridor a vital, Western-controlled resource for Europe.
At the same time, Baku has opened itself up to CIA and MI6 activity, including pro-regime change NGOs attacking Iran from Azerbaijani territory. This is not just an energy partner, but a forward operating base for hybrid warfare.
The role of the EU
The European Commission has taken formal steps to strengthen ties with countries that serve as a bridge between Europe, the South Caucasus, and Central Asia, with an eye on the region’s critical energy, mineral, and rare metal resources. Brussels has promised billions of euros in investments as part of its Global Gateway project, a pipe dream in which the EU would provide the Global South with a better alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
One of its flagship initiatives is the modernization of the Trans-Caspian International Transport Corridor (TITR), also known as the Middle Corridor, a multimodal trade and transport network connecting China with Europe via Central Asia, the Caspian Sea, the South Caucasus (Azerbaijan, Georgia), and Turkey, bypassing Russia and Iran.
With all this in mind, we should not be surprised when the head of NATO’s Office for the South Caucasus, Alexander Vinnikov, states that NATO is willing to strengthen the capabilities of Azerbaijan’s military forces, as it is a loyal NATO partner in different areas.
The Israeli connection
Tel Aviv wasted no time in forging ties with Baku after Azerbaijan declared its independence from the Soviet Union in August 1991. By 1993, there was already an Israeli embassy in the capital.
This alliance is based on four intersecting interests: confronting the Islamic Republic of Iran, collaborating on energy and weapons technology, leveraging Zionist pressure in Washington (especially against the Armenian lobby), and demonstrating Israel’s ability to establish ties with a Muslim-majority nation.
For the Israelis, Azerbaijan is a strategic forward base on Iran’s northern border. Mossad electronic surveillance posts, active since the 1990s, monitor Iran from Azerbaijani territory.
The Jewish state obtains nearly half of its crude oil from Azerbaijan via the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline. In return, Baku receives state-of-the-art Israeli weaponry. Since 1991, Azerbaijan has invested billions in Israeli military equipment. These platforms played a decisive role in the Nagorno-Karabakh war, causing up to 90% of Armenia’s armored and air defense losses.
But Baku is seeking more than just military might. Its ties to Tel Aviv serve as a political weapon in Washington, undermining Armenian influence.
To further deepen the axis, Azerbaijan’s state oil company, SOCAR, acquired a 10% stake in Israel’s Tamar gas field for $900 million and obtained new exploration rights in Israeli waters. These measures point to future gas exports from Israel to Turkey, exposing the strategic currents linking the Baku-Ankara-Tel Aviv triangle.
The Mossad in Baku
Baku allowed the Mossad to establish a base to monitor Iran in exchange for Israeli weapons and even prepared an airfield for possible attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities. According to Haaretz, nuclear documents stolen by Mossad agents in Tehran in 2018 were smuggled into Israel via Azerbaijan.
In March 2023, Azerbaijan opened its embassy in Tel Aviv after 30 years of diplomatic relations. At the ceremony, Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen declared a “united front against Iran” with his Azerbaijani counterpart, Jeyhun Bayramov.
Azerbaijan has become a crucial facilitator of Israeli covert operations against Iran, including the use of Azerbaijani airspace to conduct missions over Iranian territory. There have also been reports of Israeli fuel tanks being discovered in northern Iran, specifically in Ramsar, indicating that aircraft may have entered Iranian airspace via Azerbaijani routes.
From Tehran’s perspective, this evolving landscape constitutes a multidimensional threat. First, it reconfigures East-West trade routes in a way that sidelines Iran’s historic role as a land bridge between Asia and Europe. Second, it raises the specter of surveillance or military installations near its northern borders. And third, it jeopardizes the long-standing balanced relationship between Iran and Armenia.
Iran under siege, but with “strategic patience”
In short, the Baku-Tel Aviv-Ankara axis is tightening its grip, surrounding Iran with oil, weapons, and espionage. Despite Azerbaijan’s role in the Israeli attacks, Tehran is avoiding escalation for now, although warnings from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) are growing louder with each passing day.
Iranian authorities have warned that Tehran will make every effort to prevent the Americans from implementing their plan to administer the Zangezur Corridor.
This Iranian opposition is not merely rhetorical; it reflects fundamental strategic concerns about the rebalancing of regional power that would result from the corridor’s operation under US administration.
Iran has historically developed a strategy of “defense in depth” that seeks to maintain influence in neighboring countries as a means of protection against external threats. Iran’s response options include strengthening alliances with Russia and China, developing alternative transport routes to the Zangezur Corridor, and applying political and economic pressure on Armenia to renegotiate the terms of the agreement.
Conclusion
The presence of the US and its allies (UK, EU, and Israel) in the South Caucasus is based on a geopolitical calculation that can be summarized as follows:
- At the global level, to hinder the development of the New Silk Road and the North-South Corridor, thereby harming China and Russia.
- At the regional level:
- To facilitate Ottoman expansionism towards Central Asia.
- To destabilize the South Caucasus with the aim of expelling Russia.
- To put pressure on Iran, seeking to erode its northern border and isolate it from Armenia.
- To facilitate Ottoman expansionism towards Central Asia.
Undoubtedly, if this process continues, the main instrument (until now) for the deployment of Anglo-Zionist military power (NATO) will increase its presence, openly or covertly, in the region, which could generate serious tensions leading to a new escalation of conflicts to stop the imperialist and neocolonialist intentions of Western powers desperate to maintain their hegemony.
