It is a fact that Armenia agrees to concede part of its sovereign territory: Oskenyan

It does not matter whether the so-called 'Zangezur corridor' will be governed by Armenia, the USA, or some 'international administrator', whether it will be leased for a hundred, ten, or one year, or what diplomatic packaging it is presented with. The fact is that Armenia agrees to temporarily or permanently concede control over any part of its sovereign territory, and this is unacceptable. This was stated by the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, Vardan Oskenyan, on his Facebook page.

He emphasizes that for several years now, the corridor topic has been used by Baku as a political weapon to question Armenia's sovereignty and reshape the post-war settlement. 'Instead of sharply rejecting this demand, Washington's mediation has legitimized it further, turning the Azerbaijani artificial demand into a topic for discussions about “creative solutions.” This is diplomatically the same as negotiating how much land you are willing to concede from your garden in exchange for keeping the fence in place,' Oskenyan writes.

The long-time diplomat insists that through technical discussions on governance models, lease durations, and the neutrality of the administrator, Armenia is being drawn into a trap, which presents the corridor as inevitable. When the discussion shifts to how the corridor should operate, rather than whether it should exist at all, the fundamental principle of sovereignty has already been violated.

'Armenia has never agreed to grant any country extraterritorial access through Syunik. Armenian law explicitly prohibits leasing land for such purposes. The 'Crossroads of Peace' initiative — Armenia's own proposed model — envisages regional communication based on sovereignty, legality, reciprocity, and equality. The 'TRIPP' deal (which Oskenyan claims the agreement being discussed today could be referred to as 'Trump's Road to International Peace and Prosperity') — wherein a part of the road will be granted long-term to US control, violates all four of these principles,' Oskenyan writes.

He reminds that Iran has already explicitly stated it will not tolerate any foreign presence in Syunik. He is confident that supporters of the deal will declare it a 'realistic' compromise to advance peace negotiations. At the same time, Oskenyan poses the question: what kind of peace is this that begins with the violation of one side's sovereignty?

Regarding claims that the US presence is a 'neutral guarantee', according to Oskenyan, that 'neutrality' is rendered meaningless when, in fact, Azerbaijan's demand is being fulfilled. 'If the goal is genuine peace, it must instill confidence in both sides. If Azerbaijan insists it cannot trust ordinary Armenian roads to reach Nakhchivan without the 'Trump corridor', then based on the principle of reciprocity, a 'Trump corridor' is needed in Azerbaijani territory so that Armenians can also safely reach the Caspian basin for trade or travel purposes,' says the former Armenian Foreign Minister.