In an exclusive interview with The Caspian Post, John Kiriakou, former CIA intelligence officer, former senior investigator for the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and former ABC News consultant, shared his assessment of Washington’s strategic goals in the South Caucasus. He discussed the implications of U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance’s recent visit to Baku and Yerevan, the broader geopolitical context, and the potential impact on the regional balance of power.

- What are Washington's long-term strategic goals in the South Caucasus in the context of J.D. Vance's visit to Baku and Yerevan? Is this a one-time diplomatic signal or the establishment of a sustainable U.S. political and economic presence in the region?

- I believe President Donald Trump is personally frustrated that President Putin has not “allowed” him to bring the Ukraine war to an end. Trump genuinely thought he could force a deal. Yet here we are a year later, and the war continues. Why? Because the Russians believe they are winning and therefore see no need for compromise.

In that context, Vance’s trip appears to be an effort to strengthen American relations with other former Soviet republics. The broader idea may be to increase pressure on the Kremlin indirectly by reinforcing Washington’s presence and partnerships in Russia’s traditional sphere of influence.

U.S. Vice President of J.D. Vance arrives in Azerbaijan on February 10. (Source: AZERTAC)

- Can this visit be seen as part of a broader U.S. strategy to contain China and Iran, while also counterbalancing Russia’s influence in the post-Soviet space?

- Yes, I believe this is an important component of the broader strategy. President Trump is serious about the idea of regime change in Iran, although he would not frame it in those explicit terms. He believes that many Iranians want to replace their government, and he appears willing to apply external pressure to facilitate that outcome.

One U.S. aircraft carrier strike group is already deployed in the Arabian Sea, and a second is reportedly on its way. At the same time, there is ongoing clandestine pressure from both the CIA and Israel’s Mossad - something that has been widely reported in the media. In this context, building a diplomatic coalition becomes essential. I suspect that this coalition-building effort was a major objective of Vance’s trip.

- What role do transportation and energy projects, including the Zangezur Corridor and alternative routes for gas and oil supplies to Europe, play in the visit’s agenda?

- If there is one lesson I learned during my years at the CIA, the State Department, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it is that economic interests almost always come first. Strategic discussions are frequently framed in security terms, but economics is the foundation.

You can be certain that transportation corridors, energy routes, and broader economic connectivity were major topics of discussion during this visit.

- Why did Vance visit Azerbaijan and Armenia, but not Georgia? Does this indicate a shift in U.S. priorities in the region?

- That is an excellent question. Frankly, I do not know the precise reason. The United States maintains a close and productive relationship with Georgia. It is entirely possible that the omission was due to timing or scheduling considerations rather than any deliberate shift in policy.

I would be cautious about interpreting this as a fundamental change in Washington’s regional priorities without additional evidence.

Photo: Azertac

- Does Vance’s visit strengthen Azerbaijan’s position as a key U.S. strategic partner in the South Caucasus? And does it affect the balance of power between Baku and Yerevan?

- The United States works carefully to maintain constructive and balanced relations with both Azerbaijan and Armenia, despite the significant Armenian diaspora in the United States.

Azerbaijan holds clear importance for U.S. national interests, both economically and diplomatically, particularly in relation to Iran. That strategic reality was likely understood by Armenian leaders as well.

Given the current geopolitical climate and the possibility of increased tensions involving Iran, Azerbaijan’s geographic and strategic position inevitably enhances its importance in Washington’s calculations.

By Samir Muradov