FACTOMETER
en
ру
հյ
Since February 28, the military engagement by the United States and Israel against Iran have ignited manipulative and propagandistic narratives in Armenia’s information space.
The Fact Investigation Platform has particularly examined and summarized narratives about the impact of military developments in the Middle East on Armenia, and has also verified the accuracy of several widely circulated claims supporting those narratives.
Narrative #1: TRIPP as a Military-Intelligence Project Against Iran
Shortly after the launch of the joint U.S.–Israeli military operations against Iran, a number of actors in Armenia systematically began promoting manipulative narratives aimed at discrediting the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP) project and portraying it as a threat.
Various media outlets and public and political figures actively rekindled an old claim that “TRIPP is not an economic and logistics project, but rather a military-intelligence initiative aimed against Iran.”
For example, Stepan Danielyan, a member of the Mother Armenia party, in an interview with PastInfo, made an unsupported and fabricated claim that “within the framework of TRIPP, intelligence stations were to be deployed that would monitor Iran.”
 “That system was supposed to be integrated with the network of Israeli and British intelligence services stationed in Azerbaijan. Everyone has heard that there are airports in Azerbaijan from which Iran’s territory is monitored using UAVs. There has even been talk that certain strikes were carried out from Azerbaijani territory. Through TRIPP, Armenia was meant to join that global project.” |
 A member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun), in an interview with a pro-Russian media outlet, also made an unsubstantiated claim that “NATO forces will be deployed to ensure TRIPP’s security,” and then argued that “this would be a ‘red line’ for Iran, as it would effectively mean Western military presence approaching its borders.” |
Expanding on these assumptions, the same figure also spoke about a “possible Israeli presence” in Armenia which Iran would not disregard.”
Claims about military-intelligence nature are unsupported
Claims that TRIPP is a military-intelligence project are not substantiated by any credible source, document, or official statement:
- Claims about the deployment of Israeli or NATO forces within TRIPP are unfounded
- Claims about integration into Azerbaijani and British intelligence networks are unfounded
- Documents signed between Armenia and the United States indicate that TRIPP is entirely a logistics and economic project
Narrative #2: If TRIPP existed, Iran would strike Armenia”
Based on the previous false claim that TRIPP is an “anti-Iranian, even military-intelligence project,” propagandistic narratives build up another manipulative narrative that “the existence of TRIPP would turn Armenia into a military target for Iran.”
 For example, media outlets republished a Facebook user’s claim that “if TRIPP had already been built, Iranian missiles would now also be striking Syunik.” |
 On the “168 Zham” platform, a speaker claimed: “If Iran emerges victorious… they will take a very tough stance, and when Armenia wants to create TRIPP and bring in Americans, it must be ready that in the event of another such aggression, Iran will also strike Armenian territory. Because we see that Iran is currently targeting infrastructure in various countries — not only military but also economic — even when those countries are not militarily involved but have simply provided territory to the U.S. This must be taken into account.” |
 Kremlin propagandist Andrey Areshev also analyzed the U.S.–Iran–Israel conflict, presenting TRIPP as a “theater of U.S.–Iran confrontation.” |
On AlphaNews, a commentator likewise argued why TRIPP would make Armenia a target. To justify this, he made a series of false claims, including that Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan had “admitted” that within TRIPP there could be arrangements under which “goods entering Armenia from Azerbaijan would not be inspected.”
 Benjamin Matevosyan stated: “Not only would Armenians not inspect them, but there would be no inspection at all — only artificial intelligence. Dear viewers, this is essentially nothing but an extraterritorial corridor. Through such a corridor, goods — including dual-use goods, let’s put it that way — could be transported potentially posing a threat to Iran… Just imagine this: through Armenia, including toward Nakhichevan, goods would pass that could threaten Iran. We would end up in a situation where Syunik would turn into one of the theaters of confrontation between two warring powers.” |
Statements misattributed to Pashinyan and the false claim about “uninspected cargo”
Although Nikol Pashinyan has, on various occasions, spoken about innovative customs and border control technologies within TRIPP, he has never stated that goods passing through that route would not be inspected.
Moreover, customs and border control regulations within TRIPP are clearly defined. In particular, in January 2026, within the framework of the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity (TRIPP) project jointly presented in Washington by Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, customs control is explicitly stipulated in accordance with Armenian law, regardless of technological solutions.
In fact, the AlphaNews commentator’s claim that the introduction of certain customs control technologies could imply that cargo would not be inspected is false. At the same time, Pashinyan has spoken about innovative inspection mechanisms — not the absence of inspection.
The commentator further continues to build further assumptions based on this falsehood, referring to “dual-use goods that could threaten Iran” and the resulting “possible Iranian strikes.”
Narrative #3: U.S. investments will not save us — fragmented and manipulative comparisons with Gulf countries
Notably, the narrative that U.S.-funded infrastructure projects in Armenia — including TRIPP, the NVIDIA AI factory, and a data center — could be targeted by Iran is paired by another argument: comparisons with the targeting of infrastructure in Arab Gulf countries.
On Kentron TV, it was claimed that American infrastructure in Armenia “would be targeted or could be targeted in the future, just as non-military infrastructure in Arab countries.”
 Hrant Mikayelyan stated: “For example, Arab states believed that having American economic infrastructure was in itself a guarantee of no war… What we see here is that not only is it not a guarantee, but on the contrary, it can become a target. This is very important because, for example, even if a data center is built here, which theoretically may be good, in practice it may not be so.” |
 Arman Abovyan added: “We saw that neither oil nor money served as a guarantee. Who could have imagined a month ago that Dubai or Qatar would be bombed…” |
Narrative #4: Discrediting TRIPP — Regardless of the outcome of the war, the project is no longer relevant
In public discourse, another narrative is actively circulated claiming that “regardless of the outcome of the war against Iran, TRIPP will no longer hold relevance to the United States.”
 “Whatever the outcome of the war against Iran, TRIPP will lose its relevance. If they succeed, the U.S. will no longer need a route through Armenia; if they fail strategically, it is hard to imagine the U.S. implementing such a project under Iran’s nose. So, TRIPP — which has become Pashinyan’s ‘brand’ — is, to put it mildly, no longer relevant.” |
Why is the comparison misleading and manipulative?
Those pushing this narraive, while questioning the role of economic interdependence in preventing war, draw an inappropriate and manipulative comparison between the Arab Gulf states and Armenia, failing to note that — unlike Armenia — all those countries host U.S. military bases.
In fact, Iran has declared and targeted exclusively the military and civilian infrastructure of countries where there is U.S. or NATO military presence — whether in the form of bases or other arrangements — and which have provided their territory for military operations against Iran.
The infographic below illustrates the geography of U.S. military deployments and Iranian strikes.
In reality, according to officially confirmed information, Iran has targeted only those countries from which it has received attacks or which have American military presence.
Therefore, the comparison between Gulf countries and Armenia is manipulative and incomplete.
Nane Manasyan
