As the first signs of diplomatic movement begin to emerge around the Ukrainian dossier, the international system is preparing for a new phase of redistributing attention and resources. The South Caucasus is inevitably among the regions to which major powers may return after years of being absorbed by the conflict in Ukraine. Even the possibility of a settlement creates the conditions for a strategic recalibration, and in this transitional period the ability of regional actors to adapt to the shifting logic of global power centers becomes particularly important.
Russia has long viewed the post-Soviet space as an area of privileged influence, yet its current capabilities are constrained not only by military and economic costs, but also by the need to concentrate on Central Asia, where competition with China has intensified alongside growing U.S. and EU activity. This reduces the likelihood that Moscow will attempt to force new scenarios in the South Caucasus. Moreover, the relative stability that emerged after the Second Karabakh War is objectively beneficial for Russia itself, as any spark of tension near its southern borders risks spilling over into the North Caucasus. In this context, Azerbaijan—having reshaped the status quo and initiated a new regional architecture—is viewed by Moscow more as a source of predictability than a strategic challenge.
Against this backdrop, transit and infrastructure initiatives promoted by the United States and its European partners are gaining importance. The project known as the “Trump Route” reflects Washington’s intention to reconfigure logistical pathways between Europe and Asia and reduce reliance on unstable directions. Moscow and Tehran are unlikely to counter this effectively: Russia missed its own opportunity to implement the corridor envisioned in the 2020 trilateral declaration, while Iran, constrained by both internal pressures and external limitations, lacks the room for assertive maneuvering. Equally significant is the fact that U.S.–Russia contacts, despite the tense environment, help smooth over friction points, making the likelihood of open confrontation over the project extremely low.
Within this evolving configuration, Azerbaijan acts as an autonomous player that avoids turning the region into an arena of military-political confrontation and instead consistently promotes economic cooperation rather than ideological alignment. The growth of ties with the EU, NATO, and Turkey is unsurprising to Moscow, as Baku has never pursued membership in Western institutions and adheres to a pragmatic, multi-vector foreign policy. Europe, for its part, is structurally interested in Azerbaijani energy supplies and transit routes, which further consolidates the country’s role as an indispensable component of Euro-Asian connectivity.
The normalization of relations between Baku and Yerevan remains the key internal element of regional stability. The peace process faces pressure on the Armenian leadership from both domestic and external sources, making it vulnerable to pauses and fluctuations. Nevertheless, the fundamental interests of both sides are increasingly clear: Armenia seeks to reduce geopolitical uncertainty and secure reliable guarantees, while Azerbaijan aims to consolidate the post-conflict order and enable regional communication corridors to function without political obstruction. The trilateral understandings reached with U.S. mediation, along with gradual progress in border delimitation, provide the foundations for a peace agreement to become not only a formal document but a lasting political reality.
If the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict indeed initiates a restructuring of the broader international system, the South Caucasus could gain a unique window of opportunity. The relative weakening of Russian leverage, the growing Western interest in regional corridors, Turkey’s evolving regional role, and the expansion of cooperative formats create space for Azerbaijan to strengthen its position as an autonomous center of power. A durable peace with Armenia, in this context, becomes not merely a diplomatic success but a strategic pillar that can allow the region—after decades of recurring instability—to transition toward a more balanced and predictable trajectory of development.
