Donald Trump's TRIPP deal could change the South Caucasus forever – but will Russia and Iran let it happen?
Nakhchivan's strategic importance
Nakhchivan, a mountainous Azeri exclave between Armenia, Iran and Turkiye, has long been cut off from the mainland. The 1990s war over Nagorno-Karabakh severed the 40km Zangezur Corridor, leaving only air links or lengthy routes through Iran. Though the exclave was not part of the conflict, restoring this link has been a longstanding priority for Baku, especially after regaining control of Nagorno-Karabakh in 2020 and 2023.
The TRIPP corridor and regional power shift
The TRIPP corridor could become a vital transport hub linking Turkiye, Azerbaijan and Central Asia, boosting trade and energy flows to Europe. Analysts say it could also weaken Russia's long-standing dominance in the South Caucasus and challenge Iran's regional position. Trump's mediation bypassed years of deadlock, with both leaders praising his role and even nominating him for a Nobel Peace Prize. The deal grants Washington 99-year development rights over the route, prompting speculation about future US security presence.
Impact on Russia and Iran
Russia, with military bases in Armenia, has until now been central to mediation, but experts suggest both Armenia and Azerbaijan want to limit Moscow's influence. Iran, meanwhile, has openly opposed the TRIPP, warning it could become a base for US 'mercenaries'. Washington's involvement could increase pressure on Tehran while strengthening US influence in the Caspian energy market.
Challenges ahead
Despite the announcement, the deal is not final. Baku has affirmed Armenia's territorial integrity but still controls about 200 sq km of Armenian land. Armenia must hold a referendum to amend its constitution on Nagorno-Karabakh, and Pashinyan must navigate domestic political divisions ahead of the 2026 elections. Both Russia and Iran could still work to undermine the agreement, making its future uncertain.
To stay updated on the stories that are going viral follow Indiatimes Trending.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
7 hours ago
- Indian Express
Donald Trump reacts to Hillary Clinton's Nobel Peace Prize endorsement: ‘may have to start liking her again'
Donald Trump recently reacted to former First Lady and his 2016 presidential election rival, Hillary Clinton's mild promise of praise, as she said that she would nominate the US President for the Nobel Peace Prize if he can secure a lasting end to the war in Ukraine. 'Did you see that Hillary Clinton yesterday said that if you got this deal done and not capitulate to Putin, that she would nominate you for the Nobel Peace Prize?' Fox News host Brett Baier asked aboard Air Force One. To this, Trump responded, 'Well, uh, that was … very nice.' 'I may have to start liking her again,' he added. Baier: Hillary Clinton said that if you got this deal done and not capitulate to Putin, she would nominate you for the Nobel Peace Prize? Trump: That was very nice. I might have to start liking her again. — Acyn (@Acyn) August 15, 2025 Clinton's surprising Nobel Peace Prize endorsement for Trump Speaking on Jessica Tarlov's Raging Moderates podcast, the former Secretary of State said she would willingly put Trump's name forward if he could end the war without allowing Russian President Vladimir Putin to take Ukrainian territory. 'If he could bring about the end to this terrible war… if he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor… could really stand up to Putin,' she said. A post shared by @ragingmoderatespod 'If President Trump were the architect of that, I'd nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize. Because my goal here is to not allow capitulation to Putin,' Clinton added. Trump's summit in Alaska with Putin concluded on Friday after only a few hours, with no agreement reached to end the war in Ukraine, despite cordial exchanges between the two leaders. 'There's no deal until there's a deal,' Trump acknowledged, while Putin described their discussions as merely a 'reference point' for resolving the conflict and, importantly, a possible starting point for improved diplomatic and economic relations between Washington and Moscow. Trumps eyes Nobel Peace Prize Trump, during several instances, has expressed his desire of being honoured with the Nobel Peace Prize. Earlier, he was nominated for the prize by the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who described the US president's leadership 'of a just cause'. 'I want to express the appreciation and admiration not only of all Israelis, but of the Jewish people and many, many admirers around the world, for your leadership, your leadership of the free world, your leadership of a just cause, and the pursuit of peace and security which you are leading in many lands, but now especially in the Middle East. President has an extraordinary team, and I think our teams together make an extraordinary combination to meet challenges and seize opportunities,' Netanyahu said before presenting the letter to the US president. Thanking Netanyahu, he said, 'This I did not know. Wow, thank you very much. Coming from you in particular, this is very meaningful.' (With inputs from agencies)
NDTV
15 hours ago
- NDTV
Asim Munir Rules Out Replacing Asif Ali Zardari As Next Pakistan President: Report
Islamabad: Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir has ruled out any change in the leadership, describing rumours about the removal of President Asif Ali Zardari as completely false and against both the government and the establishment, a media report said on Saturday. In July, social media reports began to circulate that President Zardari may be asked to step down and that the army chief would take over the top office. However, top government officials - Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi - rejected such claims. Suhail Warraich, a columnist for the Jang media group, claimed in an article published Saturday that the army chief had spoken to him in person on the matter during a recent meeting in Brussels. Munir briefly stayed in Belgium on his return from last week's visit to the United States. "The talk started with politics, especially on rumours that there is some effort to change the president of Pakistan as well as the prime minister. Field Marshal Munir clearly said, during both the Brussels gathering and in his two-hour discussion with me, that the rumours about a change were completely false," Warraich claimed in the column published in the Urdu daily Jang. "There are elements behind this (rumour) who oppose both the government and the authorities and wish to create political anarchy," the army chief was quoted as saying. The article claimed that Munir also outlined his ambitions in the Brussels gathering, saying that: "God has made me protector of the country. I do not desire any position other than that." "On a question about politics, he [Munir] said that political reconciliation is possible only if there is a sincere apology," the report read. Although it was not clear who Munir was referring to, it can be inferred that he may have been referring to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf and its incarcerated leader, Imran Khan. On foreign relations, Munir was said to have expressed confidence in maintaining equilibrium between the US and China. "We will not sacrifice one friend for the other," Munir was quoted as saying. The army chief also described President Donald Trump's efforts for peace as "genuine", and said Pakistan had taken the lead in nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize, which was then followed by other nations.
The Hindu
20 hours ago
- The Hindu
Trump's Tariff Threat Tests India-US Relations
Published : Aug 16, 2025 19:25 IST - 6 MINS READ There is a distinct souring of sentiment in the narrative across India's 24-hour news channels. A news anchor opens her piece with a sarcastic diatribe on how, if only Trump were president of the USA in the past, so much could have been avoided through history; the First World War, the Second World War, all of it. The screen behind her displays an image of the US president with the text 'Earth is spinning better, thank Trump!'. The title of this video op-ed piece is 'Why Trump Should Never Win the Nobel Peace Prize'. It is a marked departure from the rapturous reception a second Trump term got only nine months back. A statement released then by India's External Affairs Ministry described how the two leaders had reaffirmed their commitment to a mutually beneficial and trusted partnership and agreed to remain in touch and meet soon. Social media and news coverage were awash with praise both for this sweeping victory and the warm and cordial relations between Mr Trump and Mr Modi. President Trump's decision and threat to now impose a 50 per cent tariff by the end of August because of India's purchase of Russian oil has escalated a stand-off over trade and led to a spiral of news flow; the US will regret treating India this way, warns one piece; US-India relations are at their worst, bemoans another. The social media clarion has sounded—it is time to ditch American products and companies like McDonald's, Coca-Cola, Amazon; although how exactly that will be done remains unclear. All this unfolding while a fresh deadline to this hefty tariff clocks down. So much has changed in nine months. India has for now been steely in its response; but both choices present hard outcomes. Global commodity data shows India imported about 1.8 million barrels per day of Russian crude in the first half of the year, which is about 37 per cent of its total imports. Since 2023, India has been the biggest market for Russian crude, and between the two largest buyers of Russian crude, India and China, it is India that is clearly more dependent. According to data and analytics company Kpler, India imported 89 million tonnes (seaborne crude) last year, which was more than China's import. Switching crude oil varieties and buyers is neither going to be easy nor practical for India's refineries, aside from the fact that it also threatens to ratchet up prices. Also Read | America's melting ice cube and other tariff fairy tales On the flip side, the collateral damage of a 50 per cent tariff slap will be large. There are a number of export-oriented industries that are already feeling jittery; textiles, for one, the gems and jewellery sector, another, where the US makes up 30 per cent of its exports. Many export-oriented industries are in fact also labour-intensive industries, and a hit to their fortunes will have a massive knock-on effect on jobs. The list of vulnerable companies includes the big gun, Reliance Industries, which signed a 10-year contract to buy nearly 5,00,000 barrels a day of crude from Russia's state-owned Rosneft, making it the biggest-ever energy agreement between the two nations. Reliance has been exporting its refined products to both Europe and North America. A breakdown in ties with Western countries will mean significant changes in its business and perhaps its profitability in the months to come. India's domestic advantage with a large consumer market has been pointed to, but whichever way you cut it, a tariff hike of this quantum will see economic damage and dented investor sentiment for the country. There are counter-arguments to the possibility of a grim reset in Indo-US ties. One, that this will be yet another flip-flop by the US President, where a resolution of some sort will be cobbled together before the end of August, which is the deadline set by him. Two, that the two countries are now intertwined across too human and financial capital strands; Indian tech firms have long been present in America's industry through its services and its engineers. Money now flows both ways through venture capital and significant equity market exposure. Ripping all that apart will take more than tariff sabre-rattling. All or some of this may prove to be true. But there are also two clear questions here that need to be reckoned with. India was used to being the 'pick me' candidate when it came to China, where there was tactical and strategic advantage in building strong relations with India to offset China's growing strength in the region. Many nations, the US included, are having a rethink about that approach. China is no longer taboo, and India is no longer the counterfoil to China's regional dominance. Worse yet is the distinct turn in relations between the US and India's other neighbour, Pakistan. What started with a rather embarrassing display of cornering credit, President Trump claimed he was the one to put a stop to an imminent war between India and Pakistan—a claim that has been consistently repeated while speaking on the subject. While Indian diplomatic channels frantically tried to belie that take, Pakistan not only concurred with the US President's statement, it went on to nominate Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. Relations between the US and Pakistan have been on the upswing since then, ranging from private lunches with Pakistan's top military brass and talks about potentially boosting trade and commercial ties. It has left the Indian government with egg on its face and a disgruntled domestic mood. India and Pakistan, to America's mind are now firmly re-hyphenated. Also Read | Modi's foreign policy in shreds as non-alignment becomes multi-alignment How did it all turn sour so quickly when the singular narrative so far has been Prime Minister Modi's outstanding personal equation with Trump—from walking out hand in hand to address a rally in Houston, Texas a few years ago, to what is now being termed the lowest point in Indo-US ties in many decades; the 'great friendship' has not yielded any joy on economic ties. Perhaps the first lesson then is when policies—foreign, national, or economic—are built around personalities rather than nations, egos tend to get in the way. Especially when there is a domestic fan base that has been cheering the 'strongman' approach to cater to. There is also a view that this could be the moment India dives into structural reforms. In other words, this will be the catalyst for the great reset. As we wait on that outcome to emerge, it gives rise to the second question: Was that not the plan with the 'Make in India' campaign launched a decade ago? What has gone so sorely wrong ten years into its launch, where is the performance audit on the promised nation-building initiatives, the manufacturing thrust, more jobs for more people? This present round of tariff threats and ultimatums could go in any direction. Frankly, it does not even matter. The economic ground is shifting beneath the feet of both leaders. Time to see who has feet of clay. Mitali Mukherjee is the Director of the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. She is a political economy journalist with more than two decades of experience in TV, print and digital journalism. Mitali has co-founded two start-ups that focussed on civil society and financial literacy and her key areas of interest are gender and climate change.
