Baku, August 30, 2025 — President Ilham Aliyev’s interview with Al Arabiya has sparked heated reactions in Moscow after he described the entry of the Red Army into Azerbaijan in April 1920 as an “occupation.” But according to Azerbaijani political analyst Farhad Mammadov, the statement was not aimed at Russia directly — it was a historical clarification rooted in facts and context.
History as Context, Not Provocation
Mammadov stressed that Aliyev’s words came in response to a question about Nakhchivan and the Zangezur corridor, not about today’s Russia.
“Aliyev provided a historical reference, based on verifiable documents — General Tukhachevsky’s orders, ultimatums to parliament, the entry of the 11th Red Army,” Mammadov explained. “It was about why Nakhchivan was cut off, not a political jab at Moscow.”
Stay Ahead with Azerbaijan.usGet exclusive translations, top stories, and analysis — straight to your inbox.
He underlined that Azerbaijan’s 1991 Declaration of Independence already defines 1920 as an occupation and names the modern state as the legal successor of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (ADR), which survived just 23 months before being extinguished by Soviet troops.
Unlike the Baltics, Mammadov added, Azerbaijan does not deny its Soviet period:
The Azerbaijan SSR existed as a state entity before joining the USSR in December 1922.
Azerbaijan honors its WWII veterans; May 9 is a national day of remembrance.
“This is our own holiday, not Moscow’s,” Mammadov said. “We respect our history but we won’t distort how independence was lost.”
Russian Media Backlash
The analyst noted that Russian officials and state-friendly media reacted with fury, casting Aliyev’s remark as anti-Russian. But he argued this reflects imperial nostalgia rather than reality.
“What irritates Moscow is not the term ‘occupation’ itself, but the reminder that the South Caucasus republics were co-founders of the Soviet Union, not passive subjects,” Mammadov said.
From Shared History to Current Tensions
The controversy comes against the backdrop of the most serious Russia–Azerbaijan crisis in decades — triggered by the downing of an Azerbaijani passenger plane over Russian territory earlier this year.
Mammadov said Baku expected Moscow to take responsibility after joint investigative work made the facts clear. Instead, Russian authorities resisted, insisting Azerbaijan should also blame Ukraine for triggering the air-defense system.
“Security of the skies over Russian territory is Russia’s responsibility,” he argued. “If they cannot ensure it, they should close their airspace. What Azerbaijan did after the accidental downing of a Russian helicopter in 2020 shows the difference: immediate apology from the president, compensation to families, and accountability.”
He called Moscow’s stance “absolutely inadequate” and warned that by refusing to resolve the matter, Russia risks internationalization of the case through ICAO and even international courts once the investigation deadlines expire.
The Ukraine Factor
Aliyev’s reference to occupation also coincided with renewed support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity — a position Azerbaijan has held since 2022. Mammadov reminded that Aliyev signed a strategic partnership document with Kyiv weeks before the alliance declaration with Moscow.
“There has always been parity,” he said. “Baku has never allowed its territory to be used against Russia, neither in the Caspian nor on land. But at the same time, we have consistently supported Ukraine’s sovereignty.”
The Human Dimension
Mammadov emphasized that beyond leaders, the Azerbaijani public and diaspora feel every twist in relations. Millions of Azerbaijanis in Russia react emotionally to discrimination or pressure.
“Any arrest or expulsion sparks deep concern,” he said. “The diaspora is not just migrants — it is part of the cultural and human bridge between the two countries. That’s why provocations are so damaging.”
He recalled the irony of Russia simultaneously awarding ethnic Azerbaijani politicians while targeting others with arrests or harassment.
Russia’s Lost Leverage
According to Mammadov, Moscow squandered its strong position after the 44-day Karabakh war:
It no longer has a security role between Baku and Yerevan after Armenia invited U.S. partnership.
It retains only a transport role through Russian Railways’ concession in Armenia.
Its role as exclusive mediator collapsed once Aliyev and Pashinyan signed agreements in Washington under U.S. auspices.
“This was unpleasant for Russia, but it could not protest because the guarantor was Trump — and no one, including Putin, wants open conflict with him,” Mammadov said.
A “New Normal” Ahead
Looking forward, Mammadov said relations will not return to their old format.
“Either we move into a managed new normal — pragmatic, with localized crises — or we slide into confrontation with constant risks of escalation, like in Yekaterinburg,” he warned.
The upcoming Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in China may offer a venue for Aliyev and Putin to meet. But even if such contact occurs, Mammadov argued, the relationship will be different:
“No more emotional closeness, no more illusions,” he said.
“Only pragmatic cooperation — or confrontation.”
Bottom Line
For Baku, Aliyev’s “history lesson” was not a provocation but a statement of fact: Azerbaijan was occupied in 1920, regained independence in 1991, and will not whitewash its past to spare Moscow’s sensitivities.
At the same time, Azerbaijan seeks constructive ties with Russia — but only on the basis of mutual respect and accountability, not imperial denial.
