Middle Corridor reshapes regional logistics as Armenia risks missing its chance

Azerbaijan’s logistics transformation continues to gain momentum as the Middle Corridor becomes an increasingly important part of the wider Eurasian transport architecture.

The route is no longer viewed simply as a transit line. It is gradually turning into a strategic geo-economic system connecting Europe, the South Caucasus, Central Asia and other regions. Hikmet Hajiyev, Assistant to the President of Azerbaijan and Head of the Foreign Policy Affairs Department of the Presidential Administration, made this point during the Trans-Caspian Forum.

According to him, the importance of the Middle Corridor is growing further amid escalation in the Persian Gulf and the broader Middle East.

Hajiyev noted that one of the key components of the Middle Corridor is the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway. He also emphasized the importance of Azerbaijan’s Nakhchivan region in the emerging connectivity architecture. The Zangezur Corridor, he said, is increasingly seen as a strategic segment of the Middle Corridor, with the potential to strengthen East-West links and ensure a direct connection between Azerbaijan, Türkiye and a wider geography, including Europe.

This is a reminder of how strongly transport routes can influence economic and political development. Railways, ports, shipping lines and logistics hubs are not just infrastructure projects; they shape trade flows, regional influence and long-term development opportunities.

Azerbaijan’s investments in the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway, the new Alat port, ferry links across the Caspian Sea, the country’s merchant fleet and modern shipbuilding capacity have all become part of a broader logistics strategy. Together, they have helped change the configuration of trade routes across the region.

The Middle Corridor has also opened new possibilities for Central Asian countries seeking economic and transport diversification. It connects Europe with countries east of the Caspian Sea and with China. At a time when traditional routes are blocked or politically risky, the value of reliable alternatives has increased sharply.

However, there is also an important historical dimension. Much of the current transport architecture was shaped during Armenia’s occupation of Azerbaijani territories. Because of that occupation, older railway routes linking the South Caucasus with Türkiye and Iran were blocked. As the regional economy still needed stable freight routes, new infrastructure was built around Armenia.

Today, as the peace process between Baku and Yerevan gains momentum, Armenia is beginning to speak about the opportunities that regional connectivity could bring.

Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has said that the opening of a transport route through Azerbaijan creates new prospects for Armenia’s trade with Central Asian countries. He noted that Armenia has so far failed to fully use the markets of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan in practical terms because of transport limitations. According to him, access through Azerbaijan could create new opportunities for trade with these countries.

Pashinyan also pointed to the Akhalkalaki-Kars railway as a route that could open opportunities for Armenia toward the European Union and Türkiye.

For now, however, these remain mostly expectations. Both Azerbaijan and Armenia use transit through Georgia, but the key difference is that Azerbaijan has already built working alternatives and integrated itself into major Eurasian logistics chains. Armenia, despite having direct borders and old railway connections with Türkiye, remains largely outside these processes.

This frustration is also visible among Armenian experts. Commenting on the Istanbul Declaration signed by Azerbaijan, Türkiye and Georgia, some in Armenia admitted that Yerevan had once again been left out of the main regional transport agenda.

One Armenian expert, Grigor Balasanyan, complained that Armenia was not mentioned as a participant in South Caucasus connectivity processes. According to him, Armenia could at least have been referred to as a potential participant in the Middle Corridor or in the context of the Akhalkalaki-Kars section of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway. Instead, Kazakhstan was mentioned as one of the key participants, while the South Caucasus appeared to be represented mainly by Azerbaijan and Georgia.

This disappointment is understandable. But the responsibility does not lie with Azerbaijan, Georgia or Türkiye.

For Armenia to become a real participant in regional transit, two steps are essential. First, a peace agreement with Azerbaijan must be signed. Second, practical progress is needed on the TRIPP project, which Armenia formally supports but has so far failed to advance through concrete measures.

Positive statements alone are not enough. Without real decisions, Armenia will continue to watch from the sidelines as new transport routes, trade corridors and economic opportunities develop around it.

Azerbaijan, meanwhile, has already turned its geographic position into a strategic advantage. Through long-term investment and political consistency, Baku has become one of the central players in the Middle Corridor.

The lesson for Armenia is clear: regional logistics rewards those who act, not those who hesitate.