Category: News

Differences between Turkey and Azerbaijan on the issue of Iran are changing the regional arrangements

US and Israeli aggression against Iran to the landscape The differences and contradictions between Ankara and Baku are becoming more and more obvious to international observers. It’s coming «the moment of truth», whose preparation has been going on for a long time.

Since the early 1990s, the two Turkic-speaking countries have declared a close alliance, but relations between the two countries have periodically deteriorated. For example, in 1995, Azerbaijan accused some Turkish citizens, allegedly linked to Turkish forces, of supporting a failed coup against then-President Heydar Aliyev.

In 2008, tensions resurfaced «football diplomacy» in the background, which was aimed at the regulation of Armenian-Turkish relations, in the conditions of the status quo, which did not satisfy Baku in Nagorno-Karabakh. The contacts came up again when Erdogan emphasized Turkey’s role in Azerbaijan’s victory in the 2020 “44-Day War” in several speeches. In Baku, they quite categorically rejected the Turkish hypothesis about Ankara’s decisive role in the war. However, from the beginning of March 2026, the conflict developing from below is qualitatively more serious.

The Turkish side, in contrast to the Azerbaijani side, is doing everything to end the conflict as soon as possible. Thus, according to the Bloomberg agency, Ankara is putting pressure on the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf so that they publicly and officially refuse to participate in aggression against Iran. of course The tensions between Ankara and Baku reflect a deeper mismatch in the views of Turkish allies on regional threats and processes, especially with regard to Israel and Iran.։ Some Baku experts they thinkCurrent trends may weaken the close ties between Azerbaijan and Turkey, creating an opportunity for Russia to strengthen its influence in the South Caucasus.

To remind, after the assassination of Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei on March 4, 2026, Aliyev visited the Iranian embassy in Baku to express his condolences. For a number of reasons, he seems to have sought to avoid participating in the conflict. But literally the next day, Iran allegedly carried out a drone attack on the capital of Azerbaijan’s Nakhichevan autonomy, injuring several people. In response, Aliyev made a speech in which he sharply accused Iran, which caused a strong negative reaction in the Turkish mass media. Deputies of the Milli Mejlis loyal to Aliyev accused media outlets linked to Erdogan’s entourage of organizing a media campaign against Aliyev’s administration.

Turkish media criticism has ranged from emphasizing Baku’s close ties with Israel to pointing to the entrenched authoritarian nature of the government in Azerbaijan, an issue long ignored by Turkish authorities. Iranian reaction has been mixed, partly due to the extreme situation, including the deaths of many of the country’s leaders, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, in bombings and terrorist attacks. Officials, including Iran’s president, have denied any involvement in the incident, while some pro-government commentators have called the strike targeted at its northern neighbor. Iran’s warning.

In turn, both the government in Baku and opposition figures used the drone attack to rekindle irredentist rhetoric against Iran’s northern territories. An analysis of sources closely intertwined with the structures of the IRGC, as well as the materials of a number of authoritative news agencies, indicates that Iran officially denies its participation in a number of drone attacks, including on the facilities of the UAE and Bahrain. Moreover, the technical identity of drones of different origin creates ideal conditions for all kinds of manipulations. Because the US ATSs, which are actively involved in the aggression imposed on Iran, are visually almost indistinguishable from the Iranian “Martyrs”, which is purposefully used in information warfare.

It is important to note that both Israel and Turkey supported Azerbaijan in the last Karabakh war։ Although the Turkish participation was more direct and decisive. Erdogan stood by Aliyev’s side in the victory parade, and Turkish military advisers played a key role in Azerbaijan’s success. Baku’s deep and multifaceted ties to the Netanyahu government, largely hidden from public and pundit eyes, remain almost decisive in determining all of Baku’s international policies.

Bilateral contacts, which began in the early 1990s, are based on a long-standing strategic partnership, the key elements of which are such directions as energy, defense, and intelligence. Suffice it to say: Azerbaijan is one of Israel’s key energy suppliers, providing a significant portion of its oil imports, while the Jewish state plays a central role in modernizing the Azerbaijani military, particularly through drone technology and advanced weapons systems.

Azerbaijan’s geographical proximity to Iran also makes it strategically important for Israel in terms of intelligence and regional positioning. Along with major Western economic players such as BP, Israeli chains are among the most important international supporters of the Aliyev administration.

This support is particularly important given the authoritarian image and vulnerability of the Azerbaijani government on the world stage. The multilateral partnership that is being talked about explains why ties with Israel are not only tactical in nature, but form the structural basis of Azerbaijan’s foreign policy.

In the current situation, Turkish pro-government media outlets express dissatisfaction more often, expecting Baku to show the priority of relations with Turkey over relations with Israel. As a result, there is not only a short-term divergence, but also a deeper structural tension within the long-term balancing strategy. While Turkey provides regional security, Israel provides international influence and strategic maneuver. However, the current crisis proves that it is increasingly difficult for Baku to maintain that balance.

The deepening of disagreements between Ankara and Baku may affect the regional balances in the Caucasus. As the US seeks to reduce its involvement in the Ukraine conflict, Russia may gradually shift its focus to the region. Although the US remains an important global player, its direct role in the South Caucasus may be limited.

Previous crises, such as the 2008 war over South Ossetia and the 2020 Karabakh war, show that Washington has shown little desire to directly intervene in regional conflicts, preferring indirect influence through partners. In this context, the weakening of the role of Turkey is not necessarily compensated by the strengthening of the participation of the USA. Despite the White House’s growing interest in the region and the much-touted “Trump Road,” the relationship remains fragile and largely conditional. Although Washington is interested in strengthening its presence in Central Asia, its willingness to act decisively in the South Caucasus remains uncertain.

Until recently, Aliyev maintained relatively constructive relations with Russia and sometimes used them as a counterbalance to Turkey, for example through close personal ties with Putin. As before, Turkey was afraid of a possible rapprochement with Moscow, its Caspian ally։ However, the situation has changed significantly. Recently, Azerbaijan has adopted a much more critical position towards Russia, in the context of protracted military operations in Ukraine, which avoids the further escalation of the conflict with Baku. On March 27, Russia’s Putin took part in the opening ceremony of the Azerbaijani State Music-Drama Theater after its reconstruction in Derbent. In April, another meeting of the Russian-Azerbaijani intergovernmental commission on economic cooperation will take place in Baku. Ambassador of Azerbaijan in Moscow Rahman Mustafayev talks about the active process of normalization and intensive restoration of relations, positive dynamics in all spheres, which are meant to smooth out the complications and misunderstandings of recent times.

International relations develop in an unpredictable manner. We live in extremely turbulent times when strategic calculations are being reviewed and reorganized. In such an environment, even improbable scenarios deserve serious consideration. The current tension between Ankara and Baku, if it escalates, may therefore signal not just a temporary rift, but a deeper strategic shift that could change the balance of power in the South Caucasus.

YURI MAVASHEV

fondsk.ru

Translation by Zhanna Avetisyan

—

Arman Tatoyan, head of the “Wings of Unity” political initiative, writes: “Two 18-year-old schoolchildren are demanding respect from those who did not show respect for dozens of believers in the church at the most precious moment for them. The self-proclaimed believer broke through the ranks of people in the middle of the liturgy, pushing people, with his bodyguard and escort, forgetting that a humble believer does not behave like that in the church.

The third, a person unknown to them, did not show “respect” in another place, in another time to the means of transport by which the government transports its teammates.

Different people with different episodes are now accused in criminal proceedings.
The charges carry a prison sentence. Now the issue of a restraining order for one of them is being examined. requested arrest.
This is exactly how law is turned into a tool, both through open pressure and legal techniques.

Several episodes are taken, every effort is made to combine them into one case, an article providing for severe punishment [imprisonment] is applied, and the impulse is transmitted to all the others.

I have been professionally engaged in the protection of human rights for many years. I know the difference between criminal prosecution and criminal intimidation. This is specific criminal intimidation.
The state, which applies the law in this way at the instigation of the government, confirms one thing. is afraid.

He is afraid of the young people in the church. He is afraid of the questions addressed to him. He is afraid of those citizens who do not show formal respect.

We need a different logic.
not a government that is protected by law, but a law that protects the citizen. Including from the government itself.”

—

168TVof “Trigger” the guest of the program political analyst, co-founder of “Kamurj” civic initiative Arman Abovyan is:

During the program, the regional situation, the confrontation between Iran, Israel and the USA and its possible consequences, the internal political situation of Armenia and the criticism of the actions of the current authorities were discussed.

Reference was made to the accusations made by Nikol Pashinyan and his team against the people of Artsakh, the developments of the situation around the Armenian Apostolic Church, as well as the future prospects of the state.

Hayk Derzyan

—

Nikol Pashinyan’s statement last week in the National Assembly that “we made a conscious sacrifice in 2020, that’s why we gained statehood and independence as a result“, in fact, is a self-confessed testimony. Expressed this opinion 168 TVof Revue on the air of the program Vitaly Mangasaryan, head of “Henaket” analytical centerspeaking about the situation in the defense sector.

According to the military expert’s assessment, Nikol Pashinyan’s statements made on the same topic and before should have criminal legal consequences, because they actually report on a crime.

“The criminal law assessment is also important here, because in fact this is a report about a crime. He admits that “what I did, I did thoughtfully”. What happened to us was premeditated, for example, if “Iskander” “tracked by 10%”, it was also premeditated, Ashotik left, I don’t know what operations he took part in in Jabrail’s position, it was also premeditated,” Vitaly Mangasaryan commented.

He emphasizes that this means that from the beginning there was no problem that we should keep Artsakh at any cost or keep this or that position and territory.

“In his Facebook post published on the occasion of the Declaration of Independence Day, Nikol Pashinyan actually admitted that they thought about the defeat of 2020, because can you imagine if we had won or, in sports language, it would have been a draw, it turns out that we would have tightened that “leash” around our neck even more.

According to Nikol Pashinyan’s logic, “we are lucky that we lost”. What happens? Let’s go back to 2020 for a moment. If, during the war, Nikol Pashinyan said: “Whoever has a helmet or a bulletproof vest at home, choose a commander from among you and go to the front”, does it mean that he deliberately sent us all to the front so that the number of victims would be large, so that he could terrorize our society due to the large number of victims, so that he could easily get rid of this “rope”? That logic works.

I proceed from the assumption that Nikol Pashinyan had initially set himself the task of getting rid of that “leash” in 2018 and was thinking of such a plan: “so how do we get rid of that leash?” Let’s say, 4-5 people get together, they think day and night: for example, what can be done, can we declare that Artsakh is Armenia, and that’s it, we will annoy the leaders of the co-chairing states of the OSCE Minsk Group a little, Azerbaijan will also be annoyed, they have taken weapons, the probability of Azerbaijan’s attack will increase, we will also make an imitation. By the way, I have talked about this on different occasions, that in 2020 we pretended that we want to keep Artsakh, that is, the leadership did not set before itself the task of keeping Artsakh, but pretended that it was trying to win the war, and now Nikol Pashinyan confirms it with his mouth, saying that if we had not lost, it would have happened to us. And that implies criminal consequences,” says Vitali Mangasaryan.

The military expert raises the question: the authorities of the day “praise themselves” so much that they bought billions of weapons, increase defense capabilities, what is all this for, if if they are not re-elected, not only will there be a “disastrous war”, but we will also lose something else.

The interlocutor of “Review” emphasizes that, in general, the country’s defense capabilities are being increased and strengthened in order to protect the borders of the state, our homeland and our homes in case of danger.

“Now if we increase our capabilities and the next step is to say that if we are not elected, there will be a war, and not only that, there will be a war, and one more thing, we will lose in that war. In that case, the question arises: why are we bragging so much, saying: we got this, we showed this, we are going to present a report to the public, what are we doing all this for? If they brag for 4 or 5 years that we spent a lot of money, bought billions worth of weapons, and at the end they stop and say that there will be a war and we will all go to war, maybe it would be better not to do all that? The state should create an institutional system. It turns out that if this person is not there, the next leader comes, some situations arise, do we have to lose? As they say, “where is the logic?” What do we want to do, what problem do we want to solve in this case?”

Mangasaryan reminds Pashinyan’s statements made at the time, for example, that “in the created geopolitical realities, even the leaders of the superpowers do not know what will happen tomorrow”, or another statement made during one of the Government meetings, that “we have been in the same class for 7 years”.

“It turns out that only one or two years have passed, the leaders of the superpowers remain in ignorance and uncertainty as before, but the military-political leadership of Armenia is able to generate such a vision and put it on “institutional foundations” that it can be evaluated in that perspective? This is in the event that the same Nikol Pashinyan announced.

“We have been in the same class for 7 years and we are all ignorant, starting with me.” He was speaking at the government session. He says that we have been in the same class for 7 years. It turns out that this group is able to solve a very difficult military-political problem, and those scientists, people who have achieved serious success in this or that field, will not be able to solve that problem, but the team led by Nikol Pashinyan is able to solve that difficult problem. Here too we see a logical break. Where is that justification, especially since we have seen the disastrous path we have taken in the last 8 years?

«Suppose, God forbid, there is a war, and who said that we will necessarily lose? In other words, from Himikvan, we tell our society that the Indian weapons, the bunkers shown by the Ministry of Defense from morning to night from different angles: from above, from the side, from the middle, the announcements to buy billions of weapons – all this aside, but since there was a war, are we necessarily going to lose? In other words, on the one hand, we say that we are going for peace, on the other hand, we say that we are buying 5-6 billion worth of weapons, but one thing is that, if there is a war, it will end badly. In other words, thinking from the beginning that you will lose, and from the beginning thinking that you will not be able to do anything, it does not fit into any logic.Vitaly Mangasaryan added.

In this context, the military expert warns and reminds that no major military exercises have been held in the RA Armed Forces since 2020.

“Do we become stronger by playing on people’s weak nerves? We will become even stronger when people participate in mass military exercises and see with their own eyes how different scenarios are played out. From 2020 until now, we have not conducted military exercises, we have only conducted military exercises with a small group of peacekeepers, and after that we announce that you know what, we have bought billions of weapons, we have made reforms, but none of us knows on the visible ground how we will use these weapons in this or that situation, who will use them, let’s say I am the commander of the military equipment calculation, if something happens to me, who will replace me.

All this should be played out in the form of military games and appropriate events, and if they just bring, wipe the dust, show them, bring people, take pictures with weapons, we have also seen those stories, how they ended, in particular, in 2019, when “Su-30” and “Osa-AK” were brought, dusted, everyone took pictures with them, in the end it turned out that there is neither normal ammunition for them, nor a pilot. Now we hold 25-day gatherings, but with them we mainly solve the problem of ensuring the number of people of position guards. No one goes and goes through an appropriate educational cycle on that Indian, French or other country’s weapon, so that we can use it effectively when needed.”

Speaking about the risks arising from the war against Iran that has been going on for more than a month, Vitali Mangasaryan raised the question: what scenarios does the Armenian defense and security system consider regarding the effects and risks of this war, for example, what will happen if Azerbaijan gets involved in the war with all the consequences arising from it, or, for example, carries out provocation in the territory of Armenia and declares that the attack was from Iran?

“At this stage, we are simulating arming. It can’t have any significance if you don’t train, you don’t hold military exercises,” added the expert.

Full interview in the video.

—