Iran Challenges Russia’s Stance on the “Zangezur Corridor”

Listen to the article

Remarks made by Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Baku on August 19 triggered a wave of heated reactions from Iran, underscoring the conflicting views Moscow and Tehran hold on a key regional issue.

Lavrov, who accompanied President Putin’s delegation, accused Armenia’s leadership of “sabotaging” the November 2020 trilateral statement signed by the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Russia that ended the 44-Day War in Nagorno-Karabakh (Artsakh). It calls for the unblocking of “all economic and transport connections in the region”, but the clause made a specific reference to transport links between Azerbaijan and its Nakhichevan (Nakhchivan) exclave via Armenian territory and provided for a direct Russian role. Baku has long controversially labeled this the “Zangezur Corridor,” using an alternative name for Armenia’s southern province of Syunik, through which Baku advocates for road and rail routes to pass.

Although Iran has long been vocal on this issue, Lavrov’s remarks caused an unprecedented uproar. The state-run Tehran Times claimed that it is the “first instance in which Moscow has clearly articulated its stance” on the issue, noting that it “surprised many observers, who did not anticipate Russia would overlook Iran’s position.”

Fury in Tehran

The outpouring of Iranian criticism of Moscow began on September 2, when Iran’s Foreign Ministry summoned Russia’s ambassador in Tehran. In a statement, Iran’s Foreign Ministry said ambassador Alexey Dedov met with Mojtaba Demirchiloo, the Assistant to Iran’s Foreign Minister and Director General of Eurasia, who ”mentioned that respect for national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and mutual interests of countries is the guarantee for lasting peace and the foundation for regional cooperation in the Caucasus.” The Iranian diplomat “emphasized” Tehran’s stance in “opposing changes to recognized international borders and geopolitical changes in the region, and the need to consider the legitimate interests and concerns of all regional countries.”

Three days later, Tasnim, an outlet linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), ran an article entitled “Russia Advised to Give Up Plan for So-Called Zangezur Corridor” advising Russia to “back off from endorsing the controversial idea.” It said Moscow should not be surprised to hear about Tehran’s “legitimate, clear and unchanging views on this issue”, warning Moscow to “never expect to resort to the idea of the Zangezur Corridor in order to settle disputes with Armenia” as its creation would “translate into the closure of one of Iran’s gateways to Europe and will reduce the number of Iran’s neighbors from 15 to 14.”

On September 5, Iran’s newly-appointed Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi took to Twitter for an indirect hit at Moscow: “Any threat from North, South, East, or West to territorial integrity of our neighbors or redrawing of boundaries is totally unacceptable and a red line for Iran.” In more explicit terms, ex-IRGC commander and current member of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaee tweeted that the behavior of Russian officials regarding the “Zangezur Corridor” is “by no means acceptable and is in clear contradiction with their expressions of friendship and strategic relations with Iran.”

Mehdi Sobhani, Iran’s ambassador in Yerevan, told Armenian reporters the next day that his country is against any corridor that would breach the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Armenia as it “goes against Armenia’s and Iran’s interests.” He added: “The dreams that some have about Armenia under different names, including the so-called corridor, will never come true.” He stated that Iran opposed any country other than Armenia attempting to establish security and control over the proposed routes.

Then lawmakers stepped forward to outline Tehran’s position. Ali Nikzad, deputy speaker of parliament advised Moscow and Baku to “respect borders”, while Ebrahim Azizi, chair of the parliament’s national security and foreign affairs committee, said that “any actions regarding the ‘Zangezur Corridor’ will be met with a strong and firm response from Iran.” Fadahossein Maleki, a member of the same committee, described Moscow’s backing of the “corridor” a “stab in the back” to Iran, which will show a “decisive reaction” if it is marginalized or a threat is posed to its borders.

Another deputy, Hassan Qashqavi, said Moscow “must respect” the direct border connection between Iran and Armenia, which has a history of several thousand years. Ahmad Naderi, a hardline member of the parliament’s presidium, complained that the lack of an appropriate response to previous Russian actions against Iranian interests has emboldened Moscow. He said Iran’s Foreign Ministry and the armed forces “must have a clear plan to respond to geopolitical delusions.”

Iran’s Foreign Ministry sought to ease tensions. At a briefing on September 10, MFA spokesperson Nasser Kanaani said it is necessary to refer to the “exact text” of Lavrov’s remarks “in analyzing and interpreting this issue.” He said Lavrov’s statement has “paved the way for presenting various views and theories, some of which oppose the development of relations” between Iran and some of its neighbors. He said “some powers and regimes outside the region, whose interests are not harmed by instability and crises in the Caucasus, want to turn the Caucasus into an unstable region at the expense of the nations in the region.”

On September 13, came the last major remark by a senior Iranian official. Alireza Arafi, one of two deputy chiefs of the Assembly of Experts and a potential successor to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, said during Friday prayer that Iran’s foreign policy goal is to break the dominance of the “unipolar system”, which leads to cooperation with countries like China and Russia. “But we are warning Russia that despite friendly relations, it should not maneuver on issues of ownership of the three islands and the ‘Zangezur Corridor’, which are our red lines.” The “three islands”, located in the Persian Gulf, are disputed between Iran and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Yerevan Welcomes Iran’s Position

In a September 9 meeting with Iran’s ambassador, secretary of Armenia’s Security Council Armen Grigoryan said Yerevan appreciates Tehran’s stance on Armenia’s territorial integrity and border and stated that “no force can sever the territorial link” between the two countries. Other senior Armenian officials also welcomed Iran’s position. Parliament speaker Alen Simonyan said Yerevan called the statements coming from Tehran “very important.” In a meeting in Yerevan on September 10, Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan told Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Hassan Sheikholeslami that Armenia “highly appreciates” Tehran’s “firm position”.

When Pashinyan and Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref met in Yerevan on October 1, the sides again reiterated their positions on the issue. Pashinyan “highly appreciated Iran’s firm and public position” on Armenia’s borders and territorial integrity. Aref stressed that Tehran supports Pashinyan’s Crossroads of Peace project.

Moscow Backs Down

At a press briefing on September 11, Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova said Moscow has seen the statements by Iranian lawmakers. She said Russia maintains “constant contact” with its partners and has provided all the necessary clarifications on the matter. “We proceed from the assumption that the arguments we presented were heard and understood in Tehran,” Zakharova added. She said the “anti-Russian information campaign” was “inspired by certain circles that use any—even the most absurd—opportunity to sow discord in the expanding strategic partnership between Moscow and Tehran”, adding that its only beneficiary is the West.

On the same day, Ali Akbar Ahmadian, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, met with his Russian counterpart Sergei Shoigu, who was quoted by Iran’s state-affiliated media as saying that “Russia adheres to previous agreements with Tehran regarding the “Zangezur Corridor”, and Moscow’s policy in this regard has not changed at all.”

Shoigu made an unannounced visit to Iran a week later, on September 17. According to Iranian state media, he “reiterated” Moscow’s “support for Iran’s policy regarding corridors and transportation routes” with Azerbaijan” in a meeting with his Iranian counterpart Ahmadian. Shoigu also met with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and, according to the state media in Tehran, emphasized that President Putin asked him to convey to senior Iranian officials that Moscow’s position on “cooperation with Iran in regional issues has not changed.” No official readouts were released by Russia, but state-run TASS and RIA agencies reported citing Iranian sources.

Analysis

Eldar Mamedov, a Brussels-based foreign policy expert on Iran, noted that the Iranian backlash came “across the political spectrum”. He argues that Shoigu’s September 17 remarks indicate that Moscow has bowed to Iranian pressure as it faces challenges sustaining its wartime economy. The row occurred amid Western allegations that Iran has transferred ballistic missiles to Russia. According to Mamedov, Iran reportedly threatened—behind closed doors–to halt negotiations on a strategic partnership agreement and downgrade bilateral relations.

Iranian state-affiliated Mehr news agency gave three reasons for Iran’s vocal opposition to the “Zangezur Corridor”. First, it warned that Iran would “lose” its border with Armenia if the project is realized. Second, Iran would “lose its alternative route to Europe as well as its transit importance”. Third, its route, expected to connect China with Europe, “challenges Iran’s geostrategic advantages.” An op-ed published by Mehr argued that Moscow aims to “regain its lost role in the Caucasus region against Turkey” by raising the issue.

Iran’s former ambassador to Baku, Mohsen Pakaeen, took a softer stance. He argued that Tehran should talk with Moscow and Baku to “resolve the ambiguities”. He suggested that Lavrov’s remarks appeared to be “more like pressure on Armenia” for its pro-Western stance and called Moscow’s stance a political one, “rather than a stance with actual potential for implementation.”

The Iranian conservative newspaper Ettelaat accused Russia of turning its back on Iran. It interviewed Ali Bigdeli, who argued that Moscow “separates its interests from” those of Tehran “in critical situations.” He warned that “a route that has been of great importance to us since ancient times is now slipping out of our hands.” The Iranian state-run Tehran Times quoted Hossein Salar Seyfodini, an analyst of the Caucasus, as saying: “I think Iranians will resist Zangezur all the way even if that means they need to intervene militarily.”

News Watch