Azerbaijan’s Eurasian Initiative: Ambitions, Challenges, and Doubts

President
of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev has unveiled an ambitious initiative to create the
so-called “Turkic Trade
Corridor” — a transport and logistics
route intended to connect the resource-rich countries of Central Asia with
European markets, while strengthening Baku’s role as a key hub in Eurasian
trade networks. According to Aliyev, Azerbaijan’s geographic location allows it
to unify several transregional routes into a single corridor, providing a
direct and “reliable” path for exporting goods from Central Asia to Europe,
whereas alternative routes through Afghanistan, Iran, or Pakistan, in his view,
remain economically and politically unviable.
In December, Azerbaijan was officially included in the
annual council of the five Central Asian countries, transforming the previous
C5 format into C6. The president described this as a diplomatic victory that,
in his words, reshapes the geopolitical configuration of the region. Experts
have noted a rise in trade turnover between Azerbaijan and Central Asian
countries: in 2024, trans-Caspian shipments exceeded 3.5 million tons, and
trade with Kazakhstan tripled compared to the previous year. However, actual
volumes remain modest compared to the Northern Corridor through Russia and
Belarus, where well-established logistics networks have ensured stable freight
flows for decades.
The
Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (Middle Corridor) already underpins
regional strategies for geopolitical balancing
The project’s logistical infrastructure exists: the Port of
Baku has expanded its capacity, container throughput has increased by more than
70%, and the Baku–Tbilisi–Kars railway provides connections to Turkey and
Europe. Nonetheless, analysts point out critical bottlenecks: the corridor
suffers from inadequate coordination between countries, weak digitalization of
customs procedures, and a lack of integrated logistics services, increasing
transit time and costs compared to alternative routes.
Particular attention is drawn to the proposed inclusion of
the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity” (TRIPP) through Armenian territory.
While an agreement between Baku and Yerevan has been signed, physical
construction has yet to begin, and the project remains not only an
infrastructure challenge but also a politically sensitive issue requiring
lengthy negotiations over control and sovereignty. The situation surrounding
these routes continues to be a subject of diplomatic consultations and could
delay implementation.
Beyond transportation issues, the president has proposed
expanding the role of the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) to include
defense initiatives. Aliyev emphasized that the international system is
experiencing a “crisis of legal regulation” and relies on power and cooperation
rather than universal norms. This framing raises caution among experts:
combining economic integration with defense cooperation may complicate
diplomatic relations with some neighbors and provoke suspicion among
international partners.
Economically, the corridor could indeed reduce Central
Asian countries’ dependence on traditional routes through Russia or Iran and
attract investment into transport infrastructure. According to analytical
reports from the World Bank and other international organizations, realizing
the corridor’s full potential requires investments not only in physical
infrastructure but also in “soft infrastructure” — digital platforms,
harmonized customs procedures, and the removal of bureaucratic barriers at borders.
However, the project faces significant challenges: it
requires substantial capital investment, coordination across multiple
countries, and the mitigation of political risks. Currently, the corridor is
only partially operational, and critics note that it remains far less
competitive than maritime routes through the Suez Canal or traditional northern
rail routes, where well-established processes ensure more predictable and
cost-effective logistics.
Although official comments from OTS leaders have yet to follow,
Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev emphasized at an autumn meeting the need
for closer cooperation among Turkic states in the context of a complex
geopolitical environment. Skeptics, however, argue that the project’s success
depends not only on ambition and statements but also on tangible steps toward
infrastructure modernization, alignment of international regulations, and
elimination of existing logistical “bottlenecks”.
The “Turkic Trade Corridor” project represents an attempt to create a multidimensional geopolitical center of influence, combining transport, trade, energy, and security. If successfully implemented, it could indeed reshape the logistical landscape of Eurasia and enhance Azerbaijan’s role as a transit hub between East and West. However, it remains unclear to what extent the plan will be able to compete with established routes, given current limitations, the need for comprehensive reforms, and potential geopolitical obstacles.
Latest newsThe Use of the “Oreshnik” Missile and a New Phase of Escalation Around Ukraine
09.Jan.2026
Solidarity Deferred: Croatia and Romania’s Dangerous Retreat
08.Jan.2026
Azerbaijan’s Eurasian Initiative: Ambitions, Challenges, and Doubts
07.Jan.2026
The Great Rotation: Personnel Reshuffles in Ukraine’s Leadership
06.Jan.2026
The United States Did Not Confirm an Alleged Ukrainian Attack on Putin’s Residence
05.Jan.2026
The Trans-Caspian Fiber Optic Cable: A Digital Milestone Connecting Europe and Asia
04.Jan.2026
Georgia Hopes for a Review of Venezuela’s Recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia Amid Ongoing Crisis
04.Jan.2026
Ukraine’s Allies Discuss Security and the Future of a Peace Settlement
03.Jan.2026
Iran Amid a Growing Domestic Crisis: Causes, Dynamics, and External Factors
03.Jan.2026
The South Caucasus in the Context of Expanding External Involvement
02.Jan.2026

13 Jan 2026


