At workshop on Armenia-Iran cooperation, future perspectives:
Regional revisionist policies ‘directed against’ Tehran, Yerevan
On November 7, a workshop, titled “Armenia-Iran: Cooperation and Perspectives,” was held in the town of Kapan, Syunik region, Armenia. Experts and scholars from leading analytical centers and scientific institutions in Armenia and Iran participated in the event. The workshop was organized by the Orbeli Analytical Center of Armenia and featured three panels with 18 presentations. It addressed the prospects for cooperation in political, trade-economic, infrastructure, transit, cultural, and other spheres, as well as existing challenges and potential solutions. Both sides emphasized the importance of increasing mutual recognition and ensuring the continuity of such contacts.
In the political panel, Armen Petrosyan, an expert at the Orbeli Analytical Center, emphasized that Iran occupies a special place in Armenia’s foreign policy. He stated that the Zangezur Corridor and the “Western and Southern Azerbaijan” thesis are false but have strategically motivated Turkic plans, which are driven by clear territorial ambitions in the region. He added that joint counter-measures to these plans make closer cooperation between Armenia and Iran even more crucial.
Ali Beman Eghbali Zarch, head of the Eurasia Department at the Institute for Political and International Studies (IPIS) of Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, emphasized, “Regarding the creation of the imaginary Zangezur Corridor, some countries, including Azerbaijan, Russia, and Turkey, are pursuing goals and interests that are not, and will not be, in the long-term interest of the region’s security.” He added that “any changes to the region’s geography, borders, or geostrategy are not acceptable to the Islamic Republic of Iran as one of the key principles of Iran’s foreign policy is maintaining the integrity of the borders of countries and not altering the geostrategy of different regions.” He further noted that the South Caucasus, in particular, plays a crucial role in regional peace and stability.
Sergei Melkonyan, an expert at the APRI Armenia Center, maintained that the absence of a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Baku’s promotion of territorial claims, Azerbaijan’s push for revisionist projects — which are supported by Turkey (such as the Zangezur Corridor) — and the creation of projects like “Western Azerbaijan,” all demonstrate the following.
“First, Baku and Ankara are conducting revisionist policies in the region, which have become factors of instability. Second, Baku’s geopolitical maximalism persists with no political will to maintain a balance of power, supported by external actors on various issues. Third, these projects are directed against Armenia and Iran.”
He continued, “Iran’s clear stance on the so-called Zangezur Corridor and its political will to protect its interests are the main obstacles to the implementation of revisionist projects by Baku and Ankara. In this sense, the alignment of positions between Yerevan and Tehran regarding the corridor acts as a stabilizing deterrent factor in the region.”
Artyom Tonoyan, a lecturer at Yerevan State University, emphasized that Israel views Azerbaijan as a base of strategic and tactical importance in the context of potential aggression against Iran. “At the regional level, Azerbaijan-Israel relations are also significant for Turkey, which earns substantial revenue from the transit of Azerbaijani oil and gas to Israel. In addition, Turkey uses these relations to prevent Iran from strengthening its ties with Azerbaijan or from promoting a stronger Shia identity among Azerbaijani society, as well as to curb the rise of pro-Iranian sentiments.” Tonoyan concluded that the stable development of Azerbaijan-Israel relations and its use as a front in the anti-Iran struggle aligns with Turkey’s interests.
Georgi Mirzabekyan, a researcher at the National Academy of Sciences of Armenia, noted that there is significant potential for sustainable cooperation in the field of media, and much work remains to be done. “For example, despite Armenia and Iran being neighboring countries, friendly states, and connected by various strategic interests, there is an impression that the societies of both countries are not very well informed about each other. In other words, there is a lack of mutual understanding,” he added. In this regard, Mirzabekyan considers the role of the media irreplaceable as it can “serve as a bridge for exchanging perspectives”. The issue of mutual recognition, he stressed, spans various spheres, from news and economic matters to important geopolitical issues.
The economic panel focused on bilateral trade, cooperation in infrastructure, and transit projects. Habibullah Malakutifar, the head of the Publishing Department at IPIS, highlighted the importance of expanding cooperation in the industrial and mining sectors, improving infrastructure for goods transit, activating and strengthening border markets, and fostering provincial cooperation.
“The only border crossing between Iran and Armenia, the Nurduz border terminal, along with the border market in this region and the Nurduz customs in East Azarbaijan province, plays a crucial role in the trade process between the two countries. Any decision to increase trade volume between Iran and Armenia requires special attention to this border terminal, including allocating credit and budgets, strengthening the workforce, and improving administrative, technical, service, and health staff. Equipping customs facilities will help facilitate and streamline the customs procedures for cargoes. With these improvements, the trade process between Iran and Armenia will become faster,” he stated.
Alireza Nazif, the head of the Iran-Armenia Friendship Association in northwest Iran, emphasized the importance of passing the North-South and Persian Gulf-Black Sea corridors through Armenia. He also stressed the need to improve Armenia’s infrastructure to support these projects. Considering the development of India’s relations with both Iran and Armenia, Nazif suggested that the cities of Tabriz and Kapan could host an international tripartite conference involving India, Iran, and Armenia.
In the cultural panel, Hasmik Kirakosyan, researcher at the Geghard Foundation pointed out that since the early Middle Ages, Armenian culture and education have been situated in the “unique cultural crucible of the Middle East,” and as a result, their development occurred in “a context of non-isolated cultural conditions”. “Among these, Armenian-Iranian historical and cultural interactions are particularly noticeable, especially since the pre-Christian period, when these historically subordinate peoples first interacted, he said, adding that it can be said that the historical contacts between these two peoples took place within the same cultural world.
“It is no coincidence that Armenian sources on the history and culture of Iran provide information that is not found in Iranian sources. For example, the Armenian language has preserved many Iranian words, terms, and names from the Middle Iranian period that modern Persian has either lost or replaced with Arabic borrowings. It should be noted with confidence that Armenian-Iranian exchanges extended beyond the political and economic realms, significantly shaping cultural spheres as well.”
Zohreh Khanmohammadi, a lecturer at Islamic Azad University, emphasized that the cultural ties between Iran and Armenia should not be seen merely as a component that strengthens the relationship between the two nations. Instead, they should also serve to reinforce relations between the governments, particularly in the political arena. Cultural exchanges, she argued, can extend beyond the cultural sphere and positively influence politics and other areas of cooperation between the two countries.
Iranian experts also visited the Zangezur Copper-Molybdenum Combine mining company in Syunik. The delegation toured the entire industrial cycle of the combine, visiting the open-pit mine and the large ore-crushing site to observe the high technical and safety standards of the mine’s operations. They also visited the Kajaran-Agarak road section, which is part of the North-South International Corridor and is being constructed by Iranian companies. The delegation observed the ongoing work on this vital infrastructure project. Before departing for Syunik, the Iranian delegation also met with high-ranking Armenian officials in Yerevan, where they discussed various issues of mutual interest.