European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, European Council President Antonio Costa and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan attended the signing of the EU-Armenia Partnership Agreement in the field of transport infrastructure. The document was signed during the European Political Partnership summit in Yerevan.

Let's say right away: We are not at all against Armenia's partnership with the EU in the transport sector, but we are in favor of the EU spending money on realistic tasks that will not remain on paper, but in practice will benefit both the Armenian side and the region. One can talk as much as one likes about the integration of Armenia's transport networks into the European logistics system, but in reality nothing will change from these conversations.

How Armenia's transport networks can be integrated into the European logistics system. Yes, it sounds beautiful, but what's in this phrase besides pleasing the ear? Basically, nothing. In order for Armenia to connect to European transport networks, it is necessary to create an infrastructure that this country has never had. These are thousands of kilometers of railways and highways, billions of euros. Somehow, the European Union does not look like a party eager to help Yerevan with all this.

For those who object that the EU undertook to finance the Nakhchivan highway, let's explain: It's only about partial financing, but Azerbaijan does the rest on its own. In the case of Armenia, we have a very sad picture. And very controversial. The scale of today's freight transportation cannot do without the railway. And there is no hardware suitable for these purposes in Armenia. Even if you really want to, the existing lines will not be able to provide international transit of goods. They are generally unsuitable for heavy trains, no matter how much you upgrade them. For example, on one of their sections in the direction of the Gaaakh region, the line runs through a dangerous landslide zone. A few years ago, there was a landslide and the road was not restored after that as it could not be restored. Yerevan is currently raising the issue of repairing this section to Russian concessionaires in the hope of using this area before TRIPP is implemented. But the SCR is in no hurry.

Maybe the EU wants to take on this pointless task? And how do Costa and Von der Leyen propose to combine all this with the European network?

Let's have the nerve and try to give some advice.

The advice is not new, it will soon be six years old. We are talking about the Zangezur corridor, which has been defamed in Europe for all these years, called a threat to Armenian sovereignty, and this important idea for Armenia has been discredited in every possible way. Instead of the Zangezur corridor, EU officials seized on the unrealizable "Crossroads of the World", constantly pushing it into all joint statements with Yerevan.

How can one not recall President Ilham Aliyev's subtle teasing in response to a question from an Armenian journalist at the last Munich Conference? "As for your so-called "Crossroads of the World," you know, when President Trump returned to power, he launched TRIPP. When President Biden returns, he will restart your Crossroads of the World," said Ilham Aliyev.

Very subtly and sarcastically, it was simply impossible to answer the provocateur's question better.

We do not know if the "Crossroads of the World" is mentioned in the agreement signed in Yerevan the day before. It would be better for Armenia if he wasn't there. If all the projects are based on this idealistic idea of Nikol Pashinyan, then nothing will work. The only way to productively integrate Armenia into international transit is the Zangezur Corridor, now called TRIPP. This is the only route that can provide large-scale and efficient logistics. And most importantly, the EU doesn't have to do much here. All we need to do is financially support the restoration of the Nakhchivan railway. All other projects can be left for later and frolic with their implementation when the country has already become a real transit country.

Other areas, as we have already said, are not suitable for the scale of today's logistics. Even if you have money, because you can't go against nature. The mountainous terrain won't allow it. Why spend billions on tunneling through mountains and building bridges over chasms when there is already a reliable way to solve the problem?

Once again, Azerbaijan is not at all against the development of Armenian transit and Yerevan's cooperation with the EU for this purpose. We are simply amazed at the pleasure with which precious time is being spent, which is needed by the region, for which the peace agenda has opened up great opportunities. If the EU had supported the Azerbaijani project at the time, instead of trampling it in every resolution, Armenia could now enjoy the fruits of its geography. In the new geopolitical situation, the South Caucasus has become the "road of life" for East and West, as well as for North and South. But it took six years of demagoguery.

Certain agreements were also reached in Yerevan in the energy sector.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said at the opening of the Armenia-EU summit in Yerevan that the European Union is ready to invest in the development of Armenia's energy sector and expand energy ties across the Black Sea, as well as support the country's infrastructure projects. The European Global Gateway initiative has already provided 2.5 billion euros of investments in this country.

At the meetings held by Nikol Pashinyan in Spain three years ago, he was promised the support of the European Commission for Armenia's participation in regional projects such as the Black Sea underwater electric cable.

On December 17, 2022, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Romania and Hungary signed a strategic partnership agreement in Bucharest, which provides for the construction of an energy bridge from the Caucasus region to Europe. In the future, Central Asia showed interest in the transit of its energy to Europe, in connection with which the construction of the Trans-Caspian energy cable began.

The Black Sea Energy project is an integral part of the energy agreements between the EU represented by the European Commission and the Republic of Azerbaijan, as well as a flagship project for Georgia as part of the EU Global Gateway project. The project has received full support from the European Union and major financial institutions. I remember that after signing the agreement in Bucharest, Armenian experts bitterly stated that Armenia had completely dropped out of regional competition in the field of electric power.

In what capacity and with what forces can Armenia participate in this project? It can join as an exporter through the Georgian electric grid. But here's the problem - the construction of the Armenia-Georgia transmission line has not started for many years. Armenian experts fear that it will never be built at this rate. The existing old energy infrastructure of the country is not suitable for energy supplies of the expected volumes. But there was a time when Armenia planned to turn into a regional electric power hub. In 2016, a roadmap was signed for the creation of a North-South energy corridor between Armenia, Georgia, Russia and Iran. Since then, things have not moved a single centimeter, but the Iran-Azerbaijan-Russia energy bridge has started working. And Armenia still cannot complete the construction of a power line towards Iran.

European Union High Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos said earlier that the EU will invest 500 million euros in strengthening energy security and diversifying Armenia's energy supply. These funds will be used to connect the Armenian energy system with the Georgian one. According to Kos, work is underway on the Armenia-Turkey energy system within the framework of the Caucasian Power Transmission Network, so that you are less dependent on Russian energy.

By the way, the agreement on Armenia's accession to the Caucasian Power Transmission Network was signed back in 2015, and the current EU leadership promises the same to the current Armenian leadership. What has been done in 11 years is not reported.

It is much easier to solve problems with electricity than with other media. Earlier, there were calls from European cabinets to abandon Russian gas and promises to ensure Armenian energy security. How? No one knows that. The EU has been promising Armenians to ensure Armenia's energy security since the time of the Karabakh clan.

To draw Armenia into its orbit, a couple of years ago, Brussels promised Armenia to ensure its energy security through supplies. And then most of them made round eyes and thought, "but how?" Indeed, but in what way?

First of all, Europe is itself an importer of fossil fuels, and it needs them. Recent geopolitical developments have further exacerbated the problem. It became clear to everyone that the course towards global decarbonization and a massive transition to renewable energy sources would have to be postponed until better times. Even with soaring oil and gas prices, it is impossible to abandon these resources. 

Secondly, even if we assume boundless altruism, which will force the EU to share the latter in order to separate Armenia from Russia and re-export fuel to this country, it is not difficult to imagine how much this "charity" will cost Armenian households.

And finally, the most important thing. There is no infrastructure that would allow the transportation of oil and gas to Armenia from European countries. She never physically existed. No, if the EU is ready to build a pipeline, that's another matter...

It is not serious to consider any other options when Armenia is neighboring a country that produces oil and gas. Azerbaijani oil products are already being shipped to Armenia. Why doesn't the EU offer Yerevan to finance a pipeline to the borders with Azerbaijan? More precisely, to restore the gas pipelines that existed in Soviet times for the supply of Azerbaijani fuel to Armenia. And at the same time, finance the restoration of Azerbaijani lines towards Armenia, which have been inactive since the early 90s? This would allow the Armenian side to resolve the issue of diversification and energy security much faster than signing even a dozen agreements with the EU.

As we can see, no matter how the problems of Armenia and their solutions are twisted, in the end they still lead to Azerbaijan. The EU is a rather vague political course for Armenia, and its closest neighbor is a reality. Therefore, it must be clearly understood that transit opportunities, energy security, and integration into international projects are unrealistic for Armenia without Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is not an improvised tool, not an addition to the project, not a traveling companion, not a passive observer. He's the main player.