At the invitation of the White House leader, the heads of the two South Caucasus states met in the American capital for the first time in many years, with direct US mediation — itself a demonstration of the shifting balance of foreign policy power in the region. The agenda included bilateral talks between Baku and Washington, Yerevan and Washington, as well as discussions on the peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia. However, the actual content of the meetings turned them into a platform for establishing new rules of the game: from the strategic alignment of South Caucasus states with the US to redefining the architecture of regional security and transport logistics.
The political foundation of the current Azerbaijan–US rapprochement began to take shape long before the August meeting at the White House. The turning point came on November 5, 2024, when, three months before the US presidential election, President Ilham Aliyev, speaking at the Global Media Forum in Shusha, publicly and openly gave high praise to then-candidate Donald Trump. Answering a journalist’s question, he stressed: “During his presidency, the United States did not start wars and demonstrated a commitment to family and traditional values.” This statement, made against the backdrop of intensifying global competition for spheres of influence, was not merely a polite diplomatic gesture but a calculated political signal of Baku’s readiness to build a deeper dialogue with the future US administration.
Donald Trump’s victory paved the way for intensified bilateral contacts. Regular phone conversations, personal correspondence, alignment of priorities, and exchanges of visits between key figures of the two states gradually created an atmosphere of trust, enabling the Washington talks to address not only current but also strategic issues.
“We have created a solid foundation for a strategic dialogue that goes beyond ordinary diplomacy,” Ilham Aliyev stated at the conclusion of the visit.
The key outcome was the signing at the White House of the Strategic Partnership Charter and a Memorandum of Understanding. These documents outlined three areas of cooperation: development of energy, trade, and transit ties; attracting investment in digital infrastructure and artificial intelligence; and deepening military–political interaction, including the supply of defense products and joint counter-terrorism efforts. Donald Trump described these documents as “a new roadmap that will bind our countries not only by interests but by mutual responsibility.”
One of the most significant results was the suspension of Section 907 of the “Freedom Support Act,” which since 1992 had restricted US government assistance to Azerbaijan under the pretext of an “Armenian blockade.” This decision — especially notable after the Biden administration reinstated the amendment — was perceived in Baku as the removal of one of the most entrenched political barriers. Equally important was the lifting of the ban on US arms supplies to Azerbaijan. President Aliyev stated plainly: “This step opens access to the most advanced defense technologies and will allow us to diversify our sources of military supplies.” For Washington, it means expanding influence in a strategically important region and strengthening the allied axes of “US–Turkey–Azerbaijan” and “US–Israel–Azerbaijan.”
Yet it was the transport and logistics agenda that became one of the central substantive blocks of the talks. Special attention was given to the “Trump Route” project (TRIPP), which envisages transferring the Meghri section of Armenia’s railway into long-term management by an American private company. Donald Trump emphasized: “Investments in infrastructure are investments in peace. This project will create new trade routes, build trust, and open the region to economic growth.”
For Baku, this corridor is a strategic artery ensuring direct and secure communication with Nakhchivan under US guarantees. For the US, it is an opportunity to secure its presence at a critical Eurasian logistics hub and gain a lever of influence over regional communications. For Moscow and Tehran, it represents a challenge, signaling the loss of control over a key transit route and reduced ability to dictate terms in the logistics sphere. The implementation of TRIPP creates complex legal issues, as until 2038 Armenia’s railways are under concession to the South Caucasus Railway (a subsidiary of Russian Railways).
The military component of the agreements was met with equal sensitivity in the region. Azerbaijan’s access to US air defense systems, precision weapons, and intelligence and communications complexes shifts the balance of power. In Baku, this is seen as a guarantee of independence from monopoly suppliers and a tool for strengthening defense capabilities. In Moscow and Tehran, it is viewed as direct US interference in the regional security architecture.
A significant symbolic outcome was the initialing of the peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia. “Initialing is not just a formality; it is the point of no return. We are fixing a reality in which territorial disputes are left in the past,” Aliyev said. For Yerevan, it signifies acceptance of a new geopolitical configuration that opens the prospect of emerging from transport and political isolation.
Another important political gesture was the initiative to dissolve the OSCE Minsk Group. Created in the early 1990s to seek a peaceful settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the group failed to produce an effective solution in nearly three decades. “The Minsk Group froze the conflict but did not bring us closer to peace,” President Aliyev emphasized. For the US, supporting this step opens the way to institutionalizing new mediation formats that exclude Russia from key negotiation processes.
Institutionalizing US participation in transport and energy projects alters the regional balance of power, previously dominated by Russia, Iran, and Turkey. In response, Moscow and Tehran may resort to demonstrations of military force, economic pressure, information campaigns, and cyber operations. Increased political turbulence in Armenia aimed at derailing the agreements is also possible.
Overall, the Washington meetings and the agreements reached form a new strategic reality. For Azerbaijan, they mean strengthening independence, transit potential, and defense capability; for Armenia — a chance for economic unblocking; for the US — consolidation of its role as the leading external player; for Moscow and Tehran — the necessity to adapt to new conditions. As Donald Trump summed it up: “This meeting is the beginning of a new chapter in the history of the South Caucasus, and we intend to make it a success story.”
Ilgar Velizade
