Opinion: Russia and the United States may consider Iran and Ukraine issues comprehensively
President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of the United States Donald Trump. Photo.
Responding to questions from EADaily, an editorial office in Yerevan, about the results of high-level talks between Russia and the United States in Anchorage, as well as subsequent meetings between US President Donald Trump and the head of the Kiev regime, Vladimir Zelenskyy, EU leaders, and NATO Secretary General, Vigen Aboyan, a researcher and journalist in the post-Soviet space, provided his response.
Vigen Aboyan. Photo.
— The results of the recent summit between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump have shown that expectations for this meeting were too high. There was no major breakthrough, either in the Ukraine crisis or in bilateral Russian-US relations. What is the reason for this situation? How long will this uncertainty last?
— It should be said that no one expected a breakthrough at this meeting. At least in Russia, the evaluations were quite restrained. Even patriots were worried that if Moscow rushed to achieve what you called a "breakthrough," it would have to make concessions on the resolution of the Ukraine issue, which cannot be done under the current circumstances of the full-scale Russian offensive.
On the other hand, the fact that Putin and Trump held a high-level face-to-face meeting itself is already a breakthrough. This means that Trump overcame the resistance of the "deep state" and engaged in direct dialogue with Putin. Don't forget that before the Anchorage summit, the presidents of Russia and the United States had a series of long phone calls. This indicates that both sides had already reached a preliminary consensus on a number of issues of mutual concern before the summit.
The results of the high-level meeting are evident. After coordinating positions with the Russian side, Trump convened negotiations with Zelenskyy and his support teams from the EU and NATO. Washington officially publicly attributed the responsibility for the ongoing conflict to the Ukrainian leadership and transferred the costs required to continue this bloody conflict (and the victory of the Russian army) to the EU countries and the European Commission. In this way, Trump "cleared himself," got rid of "Biden's war," and most importantly, retained the right to develop relations with Russia at a new level - that is, the level of lifting sanctions and implementing investment projects. The official representatives of the US and Russia have publicly expressed their views on this.
Therefore, it cannot be said that there is currently some kind of "uncertainty." Everything is quite clear. Trump does not want to go to war with Russia, he considers it unprofitable and counterproductive. This is a fact. Moreover, if the 2020 election had not been "stolen," "this war would not have happened." So, he is indeed trying to facilitate a meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy, just like facilitating a meeting between Aliyev and Pashinyan, so they can quickly reach an agreement and get closer to the Nobel Peace Prize. It is not ruled out that Putin and Zelenskyy will meet soon and sign some agreement, and then submit an application to the Nobel Committee. However, if Zelenskyy and Europeans want to continue the war, Trump has proposed that they buy weapons from the US at market prices. Moreover, perhaps they also need to forget directly funding the Ukrainian government from the US budget or through the International Monetary Fund. And Zelenskyy now probably needs money more than weapons. Furthermore, Zelenskyy will have to start a campaign in Ukraine. The US has set this as a condition, taking into account the Kremlin's argument that the current Ukrainian president is not legitimate.
— On the logistics level, the "Trump Peace and Prosperity Path" (TRIPP) passes through the Syunik region of Armenia, and the leaders of the US, Armenia, and Azerbaijan signed an agreement on the construction of this route at the Washington summit. It could become one of the key nodes of the East-West transport corridor (the Middle Corridor), which would connect Central Asia and Europe economically through the South Caucasus and Turkey. Considering the geopolitical fragility of the South Caucasus region, what is the significance of this project?
— This project is of great importance for Azerbaijan. It concerns land transportation to the Nakhichevan exclave, and it is a smooth transportation route. The Armenian National Assembly recently significantly reduced the status of the Nakhichevan Autonomous Region. That is, after regaining control of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh), Azerbaijan is now strengthening its sovereignty over Nakhichevan.
For Turkey, TRIPP also opens up new prospects. It will gain a land route to the Caspian Sea. This will strengthen Ankara's position in the South Caucasus and Central Asia. Once the transportation line is built, Azerbaijan will be able to transfer its goods and Central Asian goods to Turkey without paying any transit tariffs. In this regard, I think the near-monopoly position of Georgia will be broken.
Whether the prospects of building TRIPP will bring new opportunities for European and Central Asian countries remains to be seen. Azerbaijan and Turkey are good partners. Their transit tariff policies may lead to the so-called "Zangazur Corridor" ultimately becoming a short bridge between Azerbaijan and Turkey. Regardless, let's wait and see.
For the US (and Israel), the significance of the TRIPP project lies in being able to control the flow of goods from Iran northwards, as well as weakening Russia's geopolitical position in the South Caucasus. Moreover, it is obviously intended to prevent China from implementing its "Belt and Road" initiative through this route. Therefore, we can speculate that TRIPP is, to varying degrees, an adversarial move for Moscow, Tehran, and Beijing. However, there are nuances, depending on the geographical location of these countries, their relationships with each other, and their relationship with the US, which is responsible for controlling the so-called "Zangazur Corridor." Everything will depend on the operational model of TRIPP (if it is actually built).
As for Armenia, in my opinion, it is about directly connecting the Turkic circle to the territory of Armenia. As Alexei Ovechkin, a Russian deputy prime minister, said, if the Armenian people are satisfied, Russia will not hinder this process.
— From the recent statements by Alexei Ovechkin regarding the intention to create the "Trump Route," it seems that Moscow is prepared to agree to implement the project. Is there any reason to believe that in its relationship with the US, Russia might take advantage of this tolerance to gain certain benefits, especially on the Ukraine issue, or to join TRIPP?
— Russia can use any methods and means to protect its own interests. So can Iran. The US is well aware that without Russia's approval, TRIPP cannot operate in the Syunik region. The fact that Pashinyan invited the Russian railway company to participate in the project, and the chairman of the Armenian State Revenue Committee stated that the route will follow the rules of the Eurasian Economic Union, clearly proves this. For Russia, a clear benefit is that this project, which is against Armenia in all aspects, was not signed in Moscow. One can imagine the scandal that those so-called "Stepan Sapahyan" figures would raise if a Russian company were to manage a direct corridor through Armenia, from Azerbaijan to Nakhichevan, for 100 years. Well, let the American companies do it. The important thing is that the goods can be transported smoothly.
The key here is how Iran accepts this outcome, because it not only faces the risk of goods flowing around its territory, but also faces the deterioration of its northern security situation, as the presence of the US and Israel in the region is increasing.
— Can the current active actions of the US in the South Caucasus be seen as an attempt by Washington to play a key role in this region located on the northern border of Iran and adjacent to the Middle East?
— Yes, absolutely. The South Caucasus is a buffer zone between Iran, Russia, and Turkey. At the same time, with the blocking of freight traffic through Russia and the increasing threats to the maritime corridor, the region has become a key logistics node connecting Europe and Asia. According to Trump's current statements, he also sees Ukraine as a buffer country between Russia and Europe. Maintaining a strong presence in buffer countries and buffer zones, as well as in promising transportation routes, allows the US to manage risks, contain competitors, and encourage partners. However, it is uncertain whether the three major regional countries - Russia, Iran, and Turkey - will agree to Washington's efforts to strengthen its position. These three countries have historically competed for influence in this area, and until recently, they even proposed solving regional issues through the "3+3" model, not allowing external forces to intervene.
On the other hand, external arbiters can also play a stabilizing role. This completely depends on the policy that the White House will pursue. As we have seen from the examples of Iran and Ukraine, one administration may sign international treaties, while another may cancel them; one administration may ignite wars, while another may try to play the role of a peacebuilder once it recognizes the facts. Hegemonic countries retain the right and have various means, but do not bear any responsibility. Unless someone demands that they do so.
— Nowadays, many analysts and political scientists believe that due to the pro-Western tendencies of Yerevan, especially Baku, Russia's tools for influence in the South Caucasus are further restricted. Does Moscow have specific plans to prevent the development of such events? Overall, what is the potential for Russia to recover lost territories in this strategically important region?
— First, it needs to be clarified what interests Russia has in the South Caucasus. I believe these interests are largely related to ensuring its own security. In this regard, Russia has tremendous potential - including political, economic, and military potential. I am almost sure that Moscow's "specific action plan" in the South Caucasus will depend on the further development of the situation and the role division agreement with the US. By the way, the Iran issue and the Ukraine issue may be considered together in this context. I am also convinced that Putin and Trump discussed the TRIPP project in Alaska. The generally cautious stance of Moscow - which caused confusion in Tehran - indicates that Russia and the US have reached a certain degree of coordination of positions on the South Caucasus issue, just as on the Ukraine issue.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7540626595451617792/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your attitude by clicking the [Up/Down] buttons below.