Baku, February 20, Tamilla Mammadova, AZERTAC

The South Caucasus is currently experiencing a profound transformation: traditional patterns of influence are eroding, economic logic is increasingly intertwined with diplomacy, and infrastructure and transit are becoming no less important than traditional security concerns. In this changing landscape, Azerbaijan is increasingly asserting itself as a state capable of connecting diverse regions, interests, and cooperation formats—from Central Asia to Europe. As the South Caucasus ceases to be merely a zone of external rivalry and is increasingly viewed as a potential connectivity hub, interest in the strategies of key actors and the rationale behind their decisions is growing.

Francesco Salesio Schiavi, an Italian geopolitical analyst, expert on international security and foreign policy, researcher of processes in Eurasia and the Middle East, and author of analytical publications on global and regional geostrategy, answers questions from AZERTAC.

- How do you assess Azerbaijan's growing role as a strategic bridge between Central Asia, the South Caucasus, and Europe following its accession to the Consultative Meetings of Heads of State of Central Asia?

- Azerbaijan is increasingly positioning itself as a functional bridge rather than simply a geographic crossroads. Its participation in the Consultative Meetings of Central Asian leaders reflects a broader diplomatic shift toward structured regional connectivity. Baku is leveraging energy infrastructure, transport corridors and political dialogue simultaneously, which strengthens its relevance across Eurasian networks. The Middle Corridor in particular gives Azerbaijan strategic value.

At the same time, its ties with Gulf partners and Europe show a diversification strategy that reduces dependency on any single bloc. This multidirectional diplomacy enhances Azerbaijan’s profile as a stabilizing intermediary rather than a frontline state. If sustained, it could consolidate the South Caucasus as a connectivity hub rather than a geopolitical fault line. Much will depend, however, on regional stability and continued investment in infrastructure and regulatory coordination.

- To what extent do you think Azerbaijan's integration into Eurasian and Euro-Atlantic formats (transport corridors, energy projects, EU and NATO initiatives) is changing the traditional balance of influence in the region?

- Azerbaijan’s growing integration into both Eurasian and Euro-Atlantic frameworks is subtly reshaping regional power balances. Rather than aligning exclusively with one camp, Baku is pursuing what could be described as pragmatic multi-alignment. Energy exports to Europe, transport connectivity toward Central Asia and selective engagement with Western security formats all increase its diplomatic leverage.

The post-Second Karabakh War environment has accelerated this trend, pushing Azerbaijan to consolidate strategic autonomy. Importantly, connectivity and energy projects are not only economic tools but also instruments of geopolitical positioning. The overall effect is a more plural regional order where influence is distributed across multiple actors rather than concentrated in one hegemonic framework.

- How do current developments in projects such as the Middle Corridor and the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC) influence Europe's strategic vision for connectivity with Asia and the Caucasus?

- Projects like the Middle Corridor and the Southern Gas Corridor are becoming central to Europe’s evolving connectivity strategy with Asia and the Caucasus. The EU increasingly sees diversification of transport and energy routes as a strategic necessity rather than a purely commercial issue. The Southern Gas Corridor has already contributed to reducing reliance on single suppliers, while future expansions could further enhance Europe’s energy resilience. Meanwhile, the Middle Corridor offers an alternative logistics route linking Europe with Central Asia and China that avoids geopolitical chokepoints. Brussels is therefore investing not only in infrastructure but also in regulatory harmonization and customs coordination. Azerbaijan sits at the heart of this emerging architecture. If connectivity projects continue to mature, they could anchor a more integrated Eurasian trade space while reinforcing Europe’s strategic autonomy in energy and supply chains.

- What role can major players (the U.S., EU, Russia, and Türkiye) play in shaping stability in the South Caucasus, and what does this mean for Azerbaijan's strategic interests?

- The South Caucasus today is increasingly defined by overlapping external influences rather than a single dominant power. The United States has stepped up diplomatic engagement, especially in mediation between Armenia and Azerbaijan, but its approach remains primarily political and economic rather than security-driven. Washington appears focused on fostering connectivity, energy cooperation and conflict de-escalation without committing to a long-term military footprint. The European Union, meanwhile, plays a more structural but less visible role. Its strengths lie in economic assistance, regulatory alignment, energy partnerships and confidence-building initiatives.

Türkiye has emerged as perhaps the most dynamic regional actor, combining defense cooperation, economic integration and political alignment with Azerbaijan, while positioning itself as a key transit and energy partner. For Azerbaijan, this multipolar environment offers strategic flexibility. Baku’s challenge is to maintain balanced relations with all major actors while safeguarding its autonomy.

- How do you assess the agreements reached at the White House in August 2025 between the US, Azerbaijan, and Armenia? Why, in your opinion, has the United States become the key mediator in the peace process, while Europe has remained largely on the sidelines?

- The August 2025 agreements marked a significant diplomatic step by linking peace negotiations to economic connectivity and transport normalization. Washington’s role as mediator reflects both its diplomatic resources and the relative disengagement of other actors. The United States has framed peace in the South Caucasus as part of broader Eurasian stability and trade integration. Europe, by contrast, has been more cautious, partly due to internal divisions and competing foreign policy priorities. The US approach emphasizes pragmatic deliverables — infrastructure, trade routes and economic incentives. Still, the agreements signaled a shift toward more economically driven diplomacy in the region.

- What does U.S. Vice President JD Vance's visit to Baku and Yerevan indicate? To what extent can the American approach—linking peace to economic and transit projects—be effective for the region?

- U.S. Vice President JD Vance’s visit to Baku and Yerevan can be interpreted as a signal of Washington’s intention to consolidate diplomatic momentum in the South Caucasus and reinforce its role as a central mediator. The trip underscored a broader US strategy that links conflict resolution with economic connectivity, energy cooperation and transit infrastructure development. This reflects a pragmatic understanding that durable stability often depends on shared economic incentives rather than purely political agreements. The American approach emphasizes tangible deliverables — reopening transport routes, expanding energy links and facilitating regional trade. These initiatives can help reduce tensions by creating mutual economic interests.

Symbolically, the visit reinforced the perception that Washington currently holds significant diplomatic initiative in the peace process. However, the effectiveness of this approach will depend on sustained follow-through, regional ownership and the ability to translate diplomatic progress into concrete economic benefits.