Russia’s shooting down of the Azerbaijan Airlines (AZAL) flight from Baku to Grozny on Christmas Day has cast a shadow over the pragmatic partnership that had developed between Baku and Moscow since the early 2020s.
Azerbaijan’s confrontational response to the tragedy — demanding apologies, compensation, and legal accountability from Moscow — reflects its perception of commanding a strong geopolitical and regional position. However, given the current alignment of political and economic interests between both states, neither the Aliyev administration nor the Kremlin appears likely to allow this crisis to compromise the mutual benefits they derive from their strategic cooperation.
The Murky Skies
AZAL flight J2-8243 from Baku to Grozny crashed on 25 December near Aktau, Kazakhstan, killing 38 of the 67 passengers onboard. Immediately following the crash, Russia’s aviation authority claimed a collision with a flock of birds caused the disaster. However, various media outlets and aviation experts soon asserted that the plane was struck by Russian air defence, basing their conclusions on footage showing missile impact and testimonies from survivors. Two days after the crash, Azerbaijani authorities likewise attributed it to “external interference.” Moreover, Russian authorities reportedly denied the damaged plane permission to land in Grozny, instead diverting it over the Caspian Sea to Aktau while jamming its GPS systems.
The crisis puts to the test a relationship that has evolved significantly in recent years. Although Azerbaijan has historically maintained pragmatic cooperation with Russia while balancing relations with the west, their partnership deepened after Moscow’s neutral stance during the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war allowed Azerbaijan’s decisive victory over Armenia. This closer alignment was later consolidated through a 2022 bilateral intelligence cooperation agreement, reflecting both states’ pragmatic anti-western autocratic alignment.
Baku’s Flexing of its Strategic Muscle
Azerbaijan’s response to the AZAL crash was notably direct and confrontational. While Moscow urged caution against ‘premature conclusions,’ Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev not only demanded apologies, compensation, and legal accountability from Russia but also publicly criticised Moscow for attempting to obscure the incident with what he termed “crazy versions” of the truth instead of acknowledging its mistake. Whether driven by genuine outrage or calculated populist messaging, this assertive stance toward the region’s most significant actor signals Baku’s confidence in its strengthened geopolitical position, shaped by several significant developments in the South Caucasus.
Azerbaijan’s emboldened position vis-a-vis Russia stems primarily from its enhanced strategic importance as a transit state for Russian logistics. Following western sanctions on Russia after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Azerbaijan has become essential for connecting Russia to unrestricted markets like Iran, the Gulf states, and India. The proposed International North-South Transport Corridor further exemplifies this strategic relationship — not coincidentally featuring as a prominent topic during Putin’s latest state visit to Azerbaijan in August 2024. Beyond its role as a transit hub, Azerbaijan has also enhanced its geopolitical position by emerging as an alternative energy supplier to Europe following Russia’s 2022 invasion. This dual strategic significance has enabled Azerbaijan to pursue a more assertive foreign policy, of which confronting the Kremlin — while indeed necessary — is only the latest example.
Moscow’s Weaker Hand
The current dynamics of the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process have further strengthened Baku’s position towards Russia. After Russia leveraged its role as mediator of the 2020 ceasefire to establish itself as a regional ‘peacekeeper’ — compromising both Azerbaijan’s and Armenia’s interests — both countries now prefer to conduct peace negotiations bilaterally, with Yerevan explicitly rejecting Russian involvement. The departure of Russian peacekeeping forces from Nagorno-Karabakh in June 2024 has removed another source of Moscow’s leverage over Baku. Moreover, with Russian-Armenian relations deteriorating and diplomatic ties with Georgia non-existent since Russia’s 2008 invasion, Azerbaijan — whose autocratic government represents Moscow’s preferred model for neighbouring states — has become Russia’s leading potential strategic partner in the South Caucasus.
Russia’s half-hearted apology in response to Baku’s accusations is similarly telling of its strategic interests in Azerbaijan. After initial attempts to spread disinformation about bird strikes and maintaining high-level silence, Russia adjusted its stance on December 28 when Putin called Aliyev. In this conversation, Putin offered rare public apologies for what he termed a “tragic incident in Russia’s airspace” while remaining silent on what caused the crash, merely noting that Russian forces were responding to Ukrainian drone attacks at the time. This uncharacteristic gesture of remorse signals Moscow’s desire to de-escalate tensions, reflecting Russia’s above-mentioned geopolitical interests in preventing this crisis from further jeopardising its strategic cooperation with Azerbaijan.
It’s not Personal. It’s Just Business
Despite its justified anger and assertive response to the tragedy, Aliyev’s apparent acceptance of Putin’s apology reveals that Azerbaijan’s approach to this crisis is also shaped by pragmatic considerations. Baku continues to benefit substantially from its cooperation with Russia across multiple domains. Economically, Azerbaijan’s non-hydrocarbon sector remains closely tied to trade with Russia, while remittances from Azerbaijani workers in Russia remain crucial for many households, particularly in rural areas. Moreover, while Azerbaijan’s position as a transit hub provides leverage over Russia, maximising this potential requires continued Russian cooperation. Azerbaijan has also significantly increased its imports of Russian gas to meet rising domestic demand as it expands energy exports to Europe — an arrangement that has drawn scrutiny from Brussels over concerns about indirect Russian gas imports — further cementing their economic interdependence.
Politically, while Azerbaijan should not be considered ‘pro-Russian,’ the Aliyev regime benefits considerably from maintaining warm relations with Moscow. Russia reinforces Aliyev’s autocratic rule through coordinated messaging and mutual support in their anti-western stance, reflecting a pragmatic alignment of authoritarian interests rather than genuine trust or ideological unity. Moreover, given the current tensions between Azerbaijan and Iran, particularly regarding Baku’s partnership with Israel, Azerbaijan appears hesitant to openly antagonise Russia, wary of finding itself caught between a rock and a hard place. Finally, Azerbaijan’s aspirations to join BRICS and further consolidate its position as a pivotal player at the crossroads of Russia, Iran, and India depend on maintaining stable relations with Moscow. These multifaceted benefits of Russian cooperation suggest that despite current tensions, both sides have compelling reasons to preserve their strategic partnership.
A Pragmatic Alignment of Authoritarian Interests
With Aliyev accepting Putin’s apologies, he also stressed two remaining demands: legal accountability and compensation for Azerbaijan and the victims’ families. Two scenarios thus emerge. If Moscow complies, tensions would likely de-escalate, with Baku framing the incident as a resolved tragic mistake. While anti-Russian sentiments in Azerbaijani society would intensify, this would not disrupt the Aliyev regime’s pragmatic ties with Moscow. However, given the Kremlin’s reluctance to accept further responsibility, this outcome seems unlikely. The more probable scenario involves a temporary deterioration of relations, marked by limited retaliatory measures like Azerbaijan’s current reduction of visa-free travel for Russians. The issue would linger through hostile political rhetoric and intensifying societal resentment in Azerbaijan toward Russia, yet the core pragmatic cooperation between the two neighbours would likely endure. Given the substantial mutual benefits of cooperation outlined above, neither side appears willing to risk a permanent rupture.
Despite the loss of 23 Azerbaijani lives, the alignment of political and economic interests between Baku and Moscow is likely to ensure the continuation of their strategic cooperation. However, the incident should serve as a stark reminder to both Azerbaijan and the world of the Kremlin’s blatant disregard for human life and dignity — reflected not only in the tragedy itself but also in Moscow’s subsequent attempts to obscure the truth. No apology can alter this reality.