Armenian Deputy Foreign Minister Vahan Kostanyan arrived in Israel on Tuesday for a series of meetings aimed at exploring the possibility of turning a new page between the two nations.
Nevertheless, behind the diplomatic contacts lie deep disagreements and sensitivities that continue to shape the bilateral relationship.
Central to the agenda is the TRIPP project - a transport corridor concept originally promoted by Azerbaijan that has recently received public diplomatic support from President Donald Trump and several American political figures.
Jerusalem views this as an opportunity to examine regional cooperation alongside a measured rapprochement with Yerevan, which maintains close ties with Iran.
However, alongside the desire to advance joint projects, several key issues continue to cast a shadow over relations.
Antisemitism and the Azerbaijan factor
Reports of vandalism against the Jewish center and synagogue in Yerevan, including arson attempts and hate graffiti, have surfaced in recent years. According to sources in the local Jewish community, some of those involved described their actions as a protest against Israeli arms sales to Azerbaijan.
Concurrently, an Anti-Defamation League (ADL) poll found a high rate of antisemitic attitudes among adults in Armenia. However, local community representatives emphasize that Jewish religious life continues freely and that authorities do not pursue a hostile policy toward them.
For officials in Jerusalem, the disparity between official reassurances and the attacks on the ground remains a lingering concern.
The 'Cows' Garden' controversy
Another sensitive issue is the controversy surrounding the "Cows' Garden" in Jerusalem's Old City Armenian Quarter. Several years ago, the Armenian Patriarchate signed a lease deal with an Israeli developer to build a hotel, but this past September it announced the complete cancellation of the agreement.
The dispute expanded into a public confrontation involving demonstrations, harsh rhetoric on social media, and activity by organizations identified with Armenian causes worldwide.
Some campaigns have utilized terms like "ethnic cleansing" to describe the land struggle, often attempting to draw parallels with the war in Gaza - phrasing that Israel completely rejects, framing the issue as a civil dispute between a church and a private company with no government involvement.
Nevertheless, the public resonance of the affair has made it a sensitive topic in relations between the states.
The Iranian connection
In the regional arena, Armenia’s ties with Iran remain a central factor in its relationship with Jerusalem. Due to its geographic isolation, Yerevan relies on Iran for trade and energy routes.
Among other things, a "gas-for-electricity" agreement has been in place for years and has been extended until 2030. Bilateral trade volume has reached approximately $700 million annually in recent years, with Armenia aiming to cross the $3 billion threshold.
Western publications, including mentions in OFAC-related documents, have pointed to possible Iranian use of Armenia for sanction-evasion logistics.
Last year, opposition reports surfaced regarding a potential $500 million arms deal, alleging the provision of Iranian Shahed drones to Yerevan. While the Armenian government officially denied these claims, the sensitivity surrounding the Tehran connection continues to be a significant factor in the Israeli approach to Armenia.
The Armenian lobbying battle
Parallel to this, the Armenian lobby in the United States, which has worked for decades to influence American foreign policy, has recently expressed criticism regarding security cooperation between Israel and Azerbaijan.
In several articles published in media outlets identified with the lobby, calls have appeared to condition every cent of US aid to Israel on a verified cessation of arms sales to Baku.
In Israel and Azerbaijan, such moves are viewed as an attempt to undermine the strategic relationship between the nations, which is based largely on the shared Iranian threat to both countries.
Within this complex context, Kostanyan’s current visit to Jerusalem is being evaluated.
Israel is interested in checking if broad economic and regional projects can be advanced, but also understands that any progress will require addressing the sensitive issues: the security of the Jewish community in Armenia, the struggle in the Armenian Quarter in Jerusalem, Yerevan-Iran relations, and how Israel is portrayed in the international arena.
If both sides succeed in reducing tensions and laying the groundwork for permanent dialogue, the visit may mark the beginning of a shift in relations. If not, it risks remaining merely a significant step that failed to overcome deep disagreements built up over the years.