“EU or EAEU?” This question has long gone beyond a choice between two integration blocs. It raises broader issues concerning economic strategy, development opportunities, international cooperation, and Armenia’s place in an evolving system of regional and global ties.

These are the issues addressed by the program “Armenia at the Crossroads of Economic Systems,” launched by the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies at the Armenian State University of Economics in cooperation with the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Economic Journalists Club. The program focuses not only on the differences and contradictions between the two integration frameworks, but also on the prospects for engagement with them, the opportunities they offer Armenia, and the economic implications of potential policy choices.

As part of the program, NEWS.am is launching a series of interviews exploring key questions surrounding Armenia’s economic choices. The project is hosted by Sos Khachikyan, head of the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies at the Armenian State University of Economics.

The first guest on Khachikyan’s program was Suren Parsyan, Associate Professor at the Armenian State University of Economics and PhD in Economics. One of the key topics of their discussion was the TRIPP project and its potential significance for Armenia.

TRIPP Is Primarily a Security Project

Assessing the project’s prospects, Parsyan suggested that it should be viewed first and foremost as a security initiative and only secondarily as an economic tool.

According to the economist, following the shift in the regional balance of power in 2020, Armenia found itself needing to seek new mechanisms to ensure its own security. Russia, he argued, was unable to guarantee the country’s security in full. Iran, which might have an interest in maintaining regional stability, was also facing serious challenges of its own. As a result, the Armenian authorities had to seek a new political solution to deter possible aggression from Turkey and Azerbaijan.

“TRIPP was primarily intended to deter possible aggression against Armenia. That is its main objective,” Parsyan stressed.

TRIPP Trade Volumes Are Likely to Be Quite Modest

At the same time, the project also has an economic dimension. According to Parsyan, it could create conditions for improving Armenia’s relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey, as well as addressing transport challenges that have long constrained the country’s economic potential.

As Parsyan noted, Armenia is effectively cut off from transport links on two sides. Even freight transportation through Georgia is affected by periodic changes in tariffs. Under these circumstances, the country needs to work toward opening its transport links and becoming a transit hub, with the ability to develop connections in both eastern and western directions.

It is in this context, the economist believes, that the significance of TRIPP should be assessed. However, he cautioned against overly optimistic expectations about the project's direct economic returns.

“We often hear various comments suggesting that TRIPP will bring us manna from heaven, that the project will become operational and we will be able to live off the money it generates. I believe the amounts involved and the trade volumes will be quite modest, at least over the next decade,” Parsyan said.

He explained that other transport routes already exist in the region and are being developed. China, in particular, is using port infrastructure in Georgia and is also building another port jointly with Azerbaijan. The plan is to transport Chinese goods to Europe via Azerbaijan and Georgia. Some of this cargo could certainly pass through Armenia as well, but the country should not rely exclusively on this route.

TRIPP Should Be Seen as an Opportunity to Open Armenia Up and Integrate It into a Broader Regional Transport Network

In Parsyan’s view, TRIPP should be seen as an opportunity to open Armenia’s borders and integrate the country into a broader regional transport network. He also pointed to the potential importance of other transport routes, including a route through Nakhchivan toward Iran and the development of connections under the North-South project.

In this context, the expert emphasized the need to simultaneously build a railway section toward Gazakh. In his assessment, this route would provide a shorter connection between east and west. In particular, the Gazakh–Ijevan section, including the route toward Semenovka, would make it possible to establish a more direct connection.

Parsyan noted that the route through TRIPP would be approximately 150–170 kilometers longer. If transportation costs along the two routes were comparable, freight carriers would naturally prefer the shorter one. That is why, he argued, railway development through Gazakh should proceed in parallel with the implementation of TRIPP, rather than being treated as an alternative that should be abandoned.

Which Industries Could Benefit from the Opening of Transport Links?

Parsyan cited the mining industry as one example of a sector that could benefit directly from the opening of transport links. Logistics is particularly important for this industry, as transportation costs have a direct impact on export opportunities and the competitiveness of its products.

The economist described the current logistics chain for transporting Armenian ore. Cargo from Syunik Province is transported to Yerevan and then sent by rail to Poti. According to him, around 70% of the products transported this way are subsequently shipped to China.

With new railway routes in place, it would be possible to transport cargo through Azerbaijani territory directly toward China. This would allow rail transport to be used along the entire route and reduce dependence on the existing logistics chain involving the port of Poti.

As a result, Armenian mining companies could become among the direct beneficiaries of the opening of transport links. Parsyan stressed that the significance of new routes goes beyond international freight transportation: railway infrastructure development could also help address the country's domestic transport needs. Overall, he believes Armenia should use TRIPP not as a standalone source of revenue, but as one element of a broader strategy to open up the country through improved transport connectivity.