Humanitarian Aid and the Paths Between Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Nagorno-Karabakh
New information indicates that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has delivered humanitarian aid to Karabakh via two routes, taking political and logistical complexities into account. One route runs through the city of Aghdam, while the other follows the Lachin corridor. The arrangement marks a practical approach to reach communities in need while negotiators assess longer-term access and safety guarantees for aid convoys.
Earlier statements from Armenian officials and several Western governments suggested that the Aghdam route could not substitute for the Lachin corridor, and that both routes should be used only in tandem. This stance reflected concerns about security, monitoring, and the reliability of supply chains through contested territories. The latest developments show a shift toward considering parallel use of the two corridors, provided the operations comply with applicable laws and regulatory frameworks.
During recent discussions in Azerbaijan, officials signaled a readiness to regulate how both Aghdam and Lachin roads are used. The ICRC is expected to formally address Baku with a position paper outlining how parallel traffic could proceed under the country’s legal system and safety standards. This approach would require careful coordination among international agencies, local authorities, and humanitarian actors to ensure transparency and accountability of aid deliveries.
Nagorno-Karabakh is a region in dispute, located at the boundary between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The self-declared republic has not received formal recognition from United Nations member states, which complicates diplomatic and humanitarian engagement. The conflict has persisted despite multiple peace efforts and agreements facilitated by foreign powers, underscoring the need for clear, consistent, and lawful access for civilians in areas affected by the fighting.
In November 2020, Armenia and Azerbaijan, with the involvement of Russia, agreed to halt hostilities in Nagorno-Karabakh. The accord included provisions for the deployment of Russian peacekeepers, the exchange of prisoners, and the transfer of certain territories to Azerbaijan while facilitating the return of refugees. The arrangement has shaped the operational environment for aid providers and the movement of people across the region since then, even as tensions and disputes over territory and resources continue.
For many observers, the Lachin corridor remains the sole land link between Armenia and Karabakh, a fact that has intensified the focus on maintaining reliable routes for essential goods and humanitarian relief. The situation became more tense last December when a group of Azerbaijani nationals blocked the corridor, raising concerns about access, security, and the protection of vulnerable populations. The broader dispute touches on natural resources as well—Baku has pressed for restrictions on the exploitation of mineral deposits in several Karabakh areas—while Yerevan has criticized actions that it views as undermining humanitarian efforts and the welfare of residents on both sides of the line of contact.
In commentary from the State Duma, Azerbaijan’s stance on Karabakh has been described as firm in advocating for security, sovereignty, and the orderly management of road access for humanitarian and civilian traffic. The ongoing dialogue among regional actors and international mediators continues to shape how aid is delivered, how populations displaced by conflict are supported, and how future agreements might balance security concerns with the urgent needs of civilians.
As observers in North America and beyond monitor these developments, experts emphasize the importance of transparent procedures, independent monitoring, and adherence to international humanitarian law. The evolving discussions around the Aghdam and Lachin routes illustrate the delicate balance between safeguarding security and ensuring timely assistance for those affected by years of conflict. The broader lesson for Canada and the United States is the value of stable governance, clear rules for cross-border humanitarian access, and cooperative engagement with international agencies to promote safety, dignity, and relief for vulnerable communities.
Notes from policy analysts highlight that sustained diplomatic efforts, consistent legal frameworks, and robust verification mechanisms are essential to reduce risk and improve the reliability of aid delivery. The path forward involves joint oversight, continuous dialogue among all parties, and a commitment to prioritizing civilian welfare over political maneuvering. Reports from parliamentary and international observers continue to stress that humanitarian corridors must operate under strict, internationally recognized standards to prevent abuse and ensure accountability for all actors involved.