BAKU, Azerbaijan, August 9. President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev has made a working visit to the US at the invitation of President Donald Trump, reflecting not only a new stage in bilateral relations but also significant changes on the political map of the entire South Caucasus. Moreover, the presence of Armenian Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, in Washington added two parallel dimensions to the diplomatic maneuvers: one was an exclusive Baku-Washington platform, and the other - Baku-Yerevan negotiations.
The Joint Declaration signed yesterday in Washington between Azerbaijan, Armenia, and the US is more than just a formal document. In essence, it is a multi-level political and economic agreement, with specific provisions enshrining the new balance of power in the region, rules of the game, and the role of external actors. This document is not merely the result of one round of negotiations but a long-term framework integrating the South Caucasus into global processes.
The first and most important element is the initialing of the future peace treaty text between Baku and Yerevan. Legally, this is not a full signing yet, but rather an agreement on the final draft. This indicates that the sides have overcome their main disagreements. The document's reference to the “need for ratification” implies a phased conclusion of the process and officially records the condition of amending Armenia’s Constitution - a strategic demand of Azerbaijan.
The second point is a joint appeal to the OSCE to terminate the OSCE Minsk Process. This move effectively dismantles the institution of post-conflict resolution, which has long lost its political relevance. The elimination of mechanisms created in a different era paves the way for new platforms free from outdated models of mediation.
One of the key provisions in the document concerns transportation. Ensuring unimpeded transit between the main territory of Azerbaijan and Nakhchivan through Armenia is not only a component of regional logistics, but part of international transport and energy corridors. This aligns with the new geoeconomic logic: physical connectivity of territories is a core condition for both political stability and investment attractiveness.
The fourth important point is the TRIPP project (Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity). This is the intersection of geopolitics and infrastructure economics: the Zangezur Corridor is envisioned as a major artery for regional development, integrated into the US's global route strategy. Essentially, it is a long-term concession project that gives American capital access to the construction and operation of transport, energy, and digital infrastructure.
The principles enshrined in the declaration - respect for international borders, renunciation of revanchism, and non-use of force in foreign policy - may seem formal, but they give the parties a foundation rooted in universal international legal standards. In the current crisis of global institutions, this can be seen as an attempt to partially restore normative politics in the region.
The final point of the document is more symbolic, but in diplomacy, symbols can be as significant as concrete provisions. The expression of gratitude to the US President for his personal mediation role cements Trump’s status as a guarantor of the process. This is a kind of “anchor” that increases the political responsibility of the parties toward Washington.
Strategically, this document can be viewed as part of a broader transformation of the global trade system. The revision of US tariff policies and the linking of market access to political agreements are shaping a new type of competitive model. In this model, integration into the Euro-Atlantic economic space becomes a pragmatic choice for countries like Azerbaijan and Armenia - a way to diversify foreign partnerships without severing ties with alternative blocs.
Azerbaijan’s internal motivations in this process consist of three interconnected factors: strategic security, economic expansion, and international legitimization of the post-war status quo.
From a security standpoint, Baku seeks to cement the outcomes of the 2020 war and the 2023 antiterrorist measures. The signing of the document with U.S. involvement serves as a “political guarantee”: any Armenian rollback would not only breach bilateral agreements but also challenge the stance of a global power.
Economic logic is equally important. Participation in major infrastructure projects - from the Zangezur Corridor to energy and digital highways - allows Azerbaijan to move beyond its oil and gas specialization, strengthening the Caspian region’s status as a logistics hub connecting the Middle East, Europe, and global markets. Here, geography and geoeconomics intersect: the region’s transport map essentially becomes a map of political influence.
The third element is international legitimization. The joint declaration signed in the presence of the US President incorporates Azerbaijani initiatives into the transatlantic diplomatic system. This matters not only for Baku-Washington relations but also for Azerbaijan’s image in Europe and Asia - as a party capable of negotiating within the framework of universal international norms.
Armenia’s motivation is more defensive in nature. Yerevan’s main goal is to reduce its foreign policy isolation and avoid economic marginalization. The loss of traditional markets, the collapse of transit routes, and cooling relations with some partners make new cooperation formats inevitable. Engaging the US as a guarantor of agreements with Azerbaijan gives Armenia both a political shield and a chance to join previously avoided projects, reformatting its infrastructure policy.
Since Donald Trump’s return to the White House, his foreign policy approach has sharply diverged from the inertia of the Biden administration - favoring concrete agreements over ideological declarations. For Baku, this signals a return to the pragmatic cooperation model typical of previous Republican administrations, where geopolitical realism outweighs rhetorical constructs.
In this context, the Memorandum of Understanding signed in Washington - providing for the creation of a strategic working group between the governments of Azerbaijan and the US - means institutionalizing a new level of partnership. It marks a shift from sporadic contacts to a systematic cooperation architecture, covering energy security, the development of transport-transit corridors, investment in high-tech (including AI), and enhanced cooperation in defense and counterterrorism.
One of the political-symbolic outcomes was Trump’s expressed intention to suspend Section 907. This legal relic from the early 1990s was long used to pressure Azerbaijan under the pretext of an “Armenian blockade.” From the standpoint of international law and equal partnership principles, this move marks Washington’s rejection of a discriminatory norm that has lost legal and political justification.
The parallel diplomatic line of President Ilham Aliyev’s visit to Washington focused on resolving Azerbaijan-Armenia relations. The key event was a meeting of the two leaders, with Donald Trump and the signing of the Joint Declaration. Unlike previous efforts, this document establishes not only political intentions but also specific legal obligations.
Particularly notable is the declaration’s provision for ensuring unimpeded land connectivity between Azerbaijan and the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic. This effectively removes the Zangezur Corridor issue from its long-standing deadlock. In Baku’s diplomacy, the corridor has always been seen as a means of restoring historical transport connectivity - not as a tool for pressuring a neighboring state. Notably, the US agreed in Washington to act as a guarantor of this route, giving the project international legal weight and significantly reducing the risk of blockage.
Tactically, one key outcome was the initialing of the peace treaty text by the foreign ministers of both countries. In international diplomacy, initialing confirms that all provisions of the document have been agreed upon, moving the process into the final signing phase. The clause on Armenia holding a constitutional referendum in 2026 turns this into a multi-stage process with clear legal phases.
For the US, deepening its strategic partnership with Baku addresses several objectives. First, it strengthens Europe’s energy diversification via routes bypassing Russia and Iran. Second, it lays the foundation for integrating the South Caucasus into intercontinental logistics networks - fully in line with the American concept of “resilient supply chains” protected from political risks.
For Azerbaijan, this new format of cooperation with Washington opens access to technology, investments, and political guarantees that previously existed only within the framework of annual presidential waivers. In this context, the suspension of Section 907 is not just a symbolic gesture but a key element in dismantling legal barriers that have long hindered full-scale cooperation.
The regional effect of the visit already extends beyond bilateral relations and into a broader political geography. Armenia’s acceptance of the conditions regarding the Zangezur Corridor and constitutional reform transforms Baku’s diplomatic initiative into a precedent that reshapes its neighbor’s political-legal landscape. With the US acting as guarantor of these agreements, a new balance of influence emerges, sidelining leading European actors - particularly France.
Symbolically, this is seen as a direct defeat of the policy line long pursued by Paris - to constrain Baku and strengthen Armenia’s international position. Moreover, the rejection of the EU’s monopoly on mediation in favor of a US-Azerbaijan platform dismantles a model in which Brussels used the peace process as a tool of political pressure.
In the long run, the visit to Washington may become the starting point for a new consensus in the South Caucasus. Within this consensus, Azerbaijan is not only the military victor but also the architect of a sustainable order—one based on security guarantees, economic interdependence, and institutional regulatory mechanisms.
The Washington document could initiate three parallel long-term processes:
First, the institutionalization of a regional format involving the US, shifting dialogue from fragile bilateralism to a more stable multilateral framework.
Second - The creation of a new logistics and energy map, with Azerbaijan taking on key transit functions, and Armenia gaining the opportunity for economic revival via international corridors.
Thus, the signed declaration is not a finish line, but a starting point. Its political weight will be determined not only by the text, but also by the ability of the parties to transform the principles enshrined in it into working mechanisms.