INFRASTRUCTURE SOVEREIGNTY IN THE EU – ARMENIA STRATEGIC AGENDA: A GEOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE 2026 JOINT DECLARATION

This article examines the infrastructure aspects of the 2026 Armenia-European Union (EU) Joint Declaration through the lens of infrastructure sovereignty and geo-economic governance. It is noted that this document establishes an important political framework for expanding cooperation between the EU and Armenia, yet its practical mechanisms remain less developed than its strategic ambitions, particularly in financing, implementation tools, institutional responsibility, and related areas. The paper analyzes the energy and transport dimensions of the new EU–Armenia cooperation agenda. Diversification, regional connectivity, and integration into European infrastructure networks are considered in the context of Armenia’s strategic sustainability. It is noted that diversification should be assessed not only as a reduction in dependence on individual suppliers but also as the preservation of Armenia’s ability to pursue a sovereign energy policy. Particular attention is paid to the prospects for the development of nuclear energy, Armenia’s participation in the Black Sea Power Cable project, the EU’s Global Gateway initiative, integration into the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T), and the TRIPP (Trump Route) project. It is argued that infrastructure integration creates new opportunities for Armenia’s economic development and regional positioning, but simultaneously creates new forms of external dependence associated with the regulatory, technological, and institutional influence of external actors. The study concludes that these initiatives may broaden Armenia’s prospects for participation in emerging Eurasian transport networks, but they do not provide effective mechanisms for overcoming the main barrier to regional integration: the absence of political will among regional and some extra-regional actors to fully unblock transport links in the South Caucasus. It therefore emphasizes the need to combine international infrastructure integration with the preservation of national control over strategic sectors.

1. Dubovik V. O., 2013. Methods for assessing the transport accessibility of a territory // Regional Research. No. 4. Pp. 11–18. (In Russ.)

2. Klimenko D. V., 2023. European Union Energy Policy // Geoeconomics of Energy. No. 4. Pp. 101–118. (In Russ.)

3. Markarov A. A., Davtyan V. S., 2025. The Strategic Significance of the NPP in Armenia’s Energy Sector: Domestic Priorities and External Pressure // Geoeconomics of Energy. No. 3. Pp. 6–20. (In Russ.)

4. Tarkhov S. A., 2018. Transport development of the territory // Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 5: Geography. No. 2. Pp. 3–9. (In Russ.)

5. Abesadze G., 2025. The Black Sea Submarine Cable and Energy Independence as a Path to Economic Stability in Georgia // Evropský Časopis Ekonomiky a Managementu. Vol. 11 (4). P. 5–10. (In Eng.)

6. Bakonyi J., 2022. Modular sovereignty and infrastructural power: The elusive materiality of international statebuilding // Security Dialogue. Vol. 53 (3). P. 256– 278. (In Eng.)

7. Diversification, concentration and renewability of the energy supply in the European Union, 2022 // Energy. Vol. 253 // https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.124097. (In Eng.)

8. Global Gateway. European Commission // https://commission.europa.eu/topics/international-partnerships/global-gateway_en, accessed 02.07.2026. (In Eng.)

9. Imbs J., Wacziarg R., 2003. Stages of Diversification // American Economic Review. Vol. 93 (1). P. 63–86. (In Eng.)

10. Joint Declaration following the first Armenia – EU Summit, 5 May 2026, Yerevan // https://www.primeminister.am/u_files/file/documents/Declaration%20Armenia-EU-05_05_26-eng.pdf, accessed 02.07.2026. (In Eng.)

11. Joint Statement on the Publication of the U.S. – Armenia Implementation Framework for the TRIPP, 13 January 2026 // https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/2026/01/joint-statement-on-the-u-s-armenia-implementationframework-for-the-trump-route-for-international-peace-and-prosperity-tripp/, accessed 02.07.2026. (In Eng.)

12. Keypour J., 2022. European Union Energy Security: Constructing a “Shelter” for Small States’ Energy Security Preservation // Slovak Journal of Political Sciences. Vol. 22 (1). P. 48–78. (In Eng.)

13. Luttwak E., 1990. From Geopolitics to Geo-Economics: Logic of Conflict, Grammar of Commerce // The National Interest. Summer. P. 17–23. (In Eng.)

14. Peace Deal Between Armenia and Azerbaijan Press Statement Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, 8 August 2025 // https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-thespokesperson/2025/08/peace-deal-between-armenia-and-azerbaijan, accessed 02.07.2026. (In Eng.)

15. Poskas P., Simonis V., Smaizys A. et al, 2011. Strategy, main stages and progress of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant decommissioning // Kerntechnik. Vol. 76 (5). P. 307– 314. (In Eng.)

16. Principles of the Crossroads of Peace // https://www.primeminister.am/u_files/file/documents/Xaxaxutyan%20xachmeruk-13_11_23.pdf, accessed 02.07.2026. (In Eng.)

17. Rodrigue J. P., Comtois C., Slack B., 2013. The Geography of Transport Systems. 3rd ed. New York, Routledge. 416 p. (In Eng.)

18. Shtern M., Herman L., Fischhendler I., Rosen G., 2025. Infrastructure sovereignty: battling over energy dominance in Jerusalem // Territory, Politics, Governance. Vol. 13 (2). P. 183–203 // https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2022.2153727. (In Eng.)

19. The Comprehensive & Enhanced Partnership Agreement between the European Union & Armenia (CEPA) // https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/comprehensiveenhanced-partnership-agreement-between-european-union-armenia-cepa_en, accessed 30.06.2026. (In Eng.)

20. The European Commission’s Tacis Programme, 1991–2006 // https://cdn.osce.org/sites/default/files/f/documents/2/1/34459.pdf, accessed 29.06.2026. (In Eng.)

21. Lekavičius V. et al, 2024. The diversification of energy resources and equipment imports in the European Union // Energy. Vol. 307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.132595. (In Eng.)