Unsurprisingly, the most vocal opponents to the the recent Armenia-Azerbaijan peace deal are Russia and Iran.

On August 8, against all odds, US president Donald J. Trump oversaw the signing of a historic peace deal between Armenian prime minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev at the White House. This was despite the fact that just a few days earlier, the French daily Le Monde ran an article entitled “Peace remains elusive between Armenia and Azerbaijan,” claiming that a possible peace deal “fuels a sense of despair” in Armenia.

To the credit of Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, this is a masterstroke that positions the United States as the leading dealmaker in the South Caucasus, supplanting both Russia and Iran. 

Russia and Iran’s Reactions

Needless to say, this does not please Moscow. Indeed, Russia has accused the West of trying to “usurp” the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace deal and “conform it to its own interests.” 

One implication of the peace agreement is that some in Armenia are now demanding that Gyumri, the Russian military base about 75 miles from the capital Yerevan, be shut down. Per the current Armenian-Russian defense agreement, the base is scheduled to remain operational until 2044. 

However, that agreement predates the 2023 clash over the disputed territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, in which the Azeris definitively routed the Armenians, and Moscow did not come to Armenia’s aid. Those who want to see Gyumri shut down now ask what the use of the base is. In addition, they contend that if peace is imminent, Armenia no longer needs Russian “protection.” 

Another party that is quite unhappy about the US-brokered Armenia-Azerbaijan peace deal is Iran. One of the significant issues involves the Trump Route of Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP), formerly known as the Zangezur Corridor, a trade and transportation corridor connecting Azerbaijan to its enclave of Nakhchivan through Armenia. Details of the TRIPP remain to be worked out, though Trump has officially authorized Rubio to proceed with developing them. However, the deal agreed to on August 8 gives the US exclusive rights to develop the TRIPP for the next 99 years.

Iran is concerned that this will harm its interests in the Caucasus. The prospect of the much-hated “Great Satan” furthering its economic and security activities next to the Iranian northwestern border obviously isn’t welcome in Tehran. Armenia’s drift from Iran’s orbit could mean the loss of a valuable sanctions workaround. Last but not least, the deal strengthens the hands of Turkey and Israel, both Azerbaijani allies. 

While visiting Yerevan after the announcement of the peace deal, Iranian president Masoud Pezeshkian took a poke at Washington’s prospective role, stating “foreign powers” should not be allowed to undermine ties between the two countries. Iranian military chief Major General Abdolrahim Mousavi stressed that “the presence of foreign powers, including the United States, is a matter of serious concern for the Caucasus.” 

Ali Velayati, top foreign policy adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, went even further, bluntly stating that “…the Islamic Republic will act decisively to protect the stability and security of the South Caucasus—with or without Russia” and that the plan was “not a commercial project but a geopolitical conspiracy” that would bring Turkey and NATO dangerously close to Iran’s northern borders, warning “such a passage will not become Trump’s property—it will become a graveyard for his mercenaries.”

Opposition Within the Armenian Diaspora

Despite the obvious “win-win” aspects of normalizing Armenia’s ties to its neighbors, Azerbaijan and Turkey, some within the Armenian diaspora communities are dramatically denouncing the agreement as a new “Munich.” Before the ink was even dry on the deal, former Armenian foreign minister Vartan Oskanian went on record warning that the TRIPP means “Armenia risks ceding sovereign territory.” 

The day after the meeting in Washington, DC, Oskanian called it a “diplomatic disgrace,” and the anti-American Armenian paper Verelq ran an op-ed in which he scathingly characterized the deal as essentially forced capitulation that has created “…new threats to Armenia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.” 

Hayk Khalatyan, a political observer with Verelq’s Information and Analytical Center, described the deal as a “complete failure for the Armenian side” that would threaten Armenia’s communications with Russia and Iran, ultimately resulting in the dissolution of the Armenian state, barring a change of government.

Most of the opposition to the deal appears to come from elements in the Armenian diaspora that are pro-Iranian and pro-Russian. Case in point, The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), and in particular its policy director, Alex Galitsky, are on record as voicing continued and persistent criticism of Israel that has closely followed Tehran’s script—particularly in regards to Israeli-Azerbaijani cooperation as well as the current conflict in Gaza..   

Unsurprisingly, the ANCA is not only attacking the peace deal, which plays into the hands of Tehran and Moscow, but also following the progressive wing of the Democratic Party in its constant critiques of President Trump. 

The opposition to the deal also includes prominent left-leaning academics such as development economist Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University’s Earth Institute. Sachs is a vocal supporter of the Kremlin position on the war with Ukraine and is also campaigning against the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace in terms strikingly similar to Iran’s, for example, “…the role of the USA here is problematic, because the US is not part of the South Caucasus region.” Sachs, who is regularly interviewed by Russian and Iranian propaganda outlets like RT and Press TV, maintains that Azerbaijan and Armenia’s governments “are being used by the US and Europe for geopolitical purposes that do not suit the interests of Azerbaijan and Armenia.” 

Vocal enemies of the peace deal, orchestrated by the United States with the help and goodwill of Armenia and Azerbaijan, are also enemies of the West, and are repeating messages pushed by Russia, Iran, and their propaganda outlets. This is unsurprising, as the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace deal killed two birds with one stone. By establishing peace in a key strategic region, it boosted American interests while undermining Russian and Iranian influence and signaling their relative weakness at the same time.