The White House hailed it as a “historic peace agreement” — a joint declaration signed by U.S. President Donald Trump, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. Moscow, however, described the event merely as a “meeting in Washington,” a deliberately muted choice of words that underscored the Kremlin’s lack of enthusiasm for America’s diplomatic push in the South Caucasus.
Russia has good reason to be cautious. A lastiBang settlement of the decades-old conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan would diminish Moscow’s influence in a region it still considers part of its natural sphere of interest.
Although the Russian Foreign Ministry refrained from outright criticism, it made clear that it does not recognize the Washington-led initiative. Russian officials stressed their own central role in past mediation efforts — notably the ceasefire negotiated with Turkey in 2020. That deal followed Azerbaijan’s military reconquest of much of Nagorno-Karabakh. By September 2023, Baku had taken the rest of the territory, prompting more than 100,000 Armenians to flee.
Russian peacekeepers failed to intervene as the fighting resumed, but the Kremlin still insists on its right to guarantee the transit corridor linking mainland Azerbaijan with its exclave Nakhchivan. Under the plan unveiled in Washington, however, that role would be handed to an American company, which would operate the route under the symbolic name “Trump Road for International Peace and Prosperity.”
Tehran’s response was even sharper than Moscow’s. The prospect of a U.S. presence directly on Armenia’s border is a red line for Iran. Senior regime figures openly warned of “war” and threatened that the new transport corridor would become a “graveyard for Trump’s mercenaries.” Together, Russia and Iran have positioned themselves against the peace initiative championed by Washington.
The United States was able to step in largely because both Armenia and Azerbaijan have grown dissatisfied with Moscow’s role. Armenia feels betrayed by its former protector and is looking increasingly toward the West, while Azerbaijan has long sought to reduce the involvement of international mediators.
Still, peace remains elusive. A draft treaty has existed since March, but signing is not expected before Armenia’s parliamentary elections in 2026. At the heart of the dispute is Armenia’s constitution, which still references unification with Karabakh in its declaration of independence. For Baku, that contradicts the treaty’s key principle of mutual recognition of territorial integrity. Pashinyan has signaled willingness to amend the constitution, but insists the change must be ratified in a referendum — impossible before next year’s vote.
In Armenia, opposition groups and parts of the diaspora already denounce the Washington accords as “treason.” In Azerbaijan, where no such electoral obstacles exist, President Aliyev is consolidating his grip on power. His latest move: threatening to supply arms to Ukraine — a gesture that underscores his growing willingness to defy Moscow.
