Policy of Intimidation: How Azerbaijan Tricked and Treated Ahead of COP29

Listen to the article.

On a warm August afternoon, an Azerbaijani peace activist’s friend waits patiently at a café. As time passes, he senses something is wrong. Bahruz Samadov is often late, but he usually sends an apologetic message.

This time is different. The friend starts to feel uneasy. He calls other acquaintances, but no one has heard from Bahruz. Gradually, the circle of friends realizes the worst has happened—the unthinkable.

Bahruz Samadov has been arrested by Azerbaijani authorities. In the days that follow, the charges emerge: treason. The evidence presented in Azerbaijani state media appears to stem from Samadov’s conversations with Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh.

The day after the arrest, another of Bahruz’s friends attempts to leave the country. He is stopped at the airport and coerced into testifying against his friend. Another individual, about to leave the country to study in Lithuania, faces the same treatment.

Azerbaijan still has its land borders closed. Initially, this was due to COVID-19 restrictions until 2024, but later it was attributed to “security concerns.” But, it’s widely believed that the real motive is to control who can leave the country, as the airport has become the only way out.

The blatantly politically motivated arrest coincides with Hikmet Hajiyev, a policy advisor to President Ilham Aliyev, repeatedly claiming that Azerbaijan advocates for peace. With the upcoming COP29 climate summit, Azerbaijan wants to present itself as a promoter of peace.

Since Azerbaijan was awarded the climate summit, at least 30 dissidents have been arrested in the country. It is clear that COP29 has enabled Azerbaijan to accelerate its persecution of dissent rather than slow it down. Azerbaijan knows this too, and now the country’s marginalized democracy movement finds itself trapped within the country. In this way, they have also been silenced.

Intimidation As Strategy

After decades of practice in responding to international criticism, Azerbaijan has developed a confrontational diplomatic strategy. Critics of Azerbaijan typically face escalated rhetoric and harsh language. In this text, I refer to the strategy as the “Policy of Intimidation”.

The Policy of Intimidation involves countering criticism by further escalating the situation. This approach clashes with diplomatic and constructive negotiation culture that seeks to avoid conflict. Azerbaijan is well aware of this strategy’s effectiveness, as it holds several geopolitical cards to play until it reaches its limits.

Azerbaijan’s strongest geopolitical assets are its gas sales and transport corridors. The West currently wants to expand trade routes to China via the Trans-Caspian Middle Corridor, with Azerbaijan serving as a gateway. Imposing sanctions would close that door.

Additionally, Azerbaijan holds a military advantage over its South Caucasian neighbors. Peace negotiations with Armenia remain stalled as Azerbaijan keeps its neighbor on edge. Western-funded organizations in Azerbaijan have also learned the risks of being too outspoken. The independent media outlet AbzasMedia experienced this reality last fall when six of its journalists were arrested within a two-week period.

As Western criticism mounted over Azerbaijan’s attack on Nagorno-Karabakh—which led to the forced exodus of the entire Armenian population, an act described as ethnic cleansing—the regime cracked down on precisely these Western-funded organizations.

In this way, the same authoritarian regime that oppresses Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh also targets dissenting Azerbaijanis like Bahruz Samadov and his peers. It is the same authoritarian rule that treats Armenian prisoners of war as pawns in a cynical bargaining game, while also cracking down on Azerbaijanis who criticize it.

Azerbaijan’s pattern of responding to criticism with increased restrictions is evident in several instances.

A personal example comes from my work with the anti-corruption watchdog OCCRP. I exposed how the Azerbaijani Red Crescent violated the fundamental principles of the Red Cross Movement. They had praised the assault on Nagorno-Karabakh and became a tool for the regime to politicize humanitarian aid.

This investigation led to Hikmet Hajiyev restricting the mandate of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Azerbaijan. The Red Cross took no action against the Azerbaijani Red Crescent. My sources within the Red Cross confided that they feared expulsion from Azerbaijan if they acted. Ultimately, the victim was punished instead of the perpetrator.

Similar incidents have occurred at higher political levels.

In the lead-up to COP29, Azerbaijan has reacted strongly to criticism from human rights organizations. Following Human Rights Watch’s release of a comprehensive report in early October, Azerbaijan launched an intense campaign to defend its position.

Documents from the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs reveal that Azerbaijan has raised this issue with Western diplomats before COP29. These documents suggest that, despite facing harsh criticism, Azerbaijan is determined not to let it impact the climate summit. Reading between the lines, it is clear that Azerbaijan is unlikely to respond favorably to continued criticism.

Those Who Play Along…

Azerbaijan also employs dubious methods to influence the outside world. Those who cooperate are welcomed into a circle of warmth that can be difficult to escape.

Personally, I faced the dilemma after the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War. Fresh from reporting in Nagorno-Karabakh, the Azerbaijani ambassador in Stockholm invited me to visit Azerbaijan. Later, a diaspora organization even offered to cover all expenses.

Had I accepted, my career as a journalist would likely have become much easier. I would have gained access to key voices in conflict reporting that I currently lack.

I not only declined the offer but also wrote about Azerbaijan’s practice of inviting journalists on these trips. It later emerged that around 1,000 journalists, decision-makers, and academics had accepted such invitations. Many of them have since become loyal to the regime and continue to promote its narrative.

Few journalists—though some exist—have managed to navigate Azerbaijan’s Policy of Intimidation without compromising their integrity. This challenge also extends to academics and, to some extent, policymakers as well.

Those who choose the path I took—scrutinizing Azerbaijan from afar rather than reporting from within—may enjoy a greater journalistic freedom. However, this approach has also given Azerbaijan grounds to accuse me of bias in the conflict. The alternative would be to compromise aspects of the journalism I wish to pursue.

My decision to investigate Azerbaijan’s methods means I must rely on official statements or other journalists’ work to present “the other side”—a necessary ethical principle in journalism.

This approach, combined with dissenting voices, has created the illusion that the regime’s view of Nagorno-Karabakh is the only one prevailing in Azerbaijan. Media outlets that buy into the regime’s infantilization of the Azerbaijani population are indirectly supporting its agenda.

Similar mechanisms are at work in politics. When Toivo Klaar, the EU’s special envoy to the region, rightfully accused Azerbaijan of committing horrific war crimes during its 2022 invasion of Armenia, a social media smear campaign against him quickly ensued.

Shortly after, Klaar published a post accusing Armenia of war crimes as well. It was evident that Azerbaijan’s pressure had forced Klaar to backpedal. When I inquired, a press secretary from the EU External Action Service claimed there was no connection between these events.

Consequences Ahead of COP29

Azerbaijan wants to host a COP29 where participants are restricted to discussing only one topic: climate issues. Attendees of the conference are expected to limit their statements to the event area and maintain a “civilized” demeanor that doesn’t cause disruption. This approach effectively creates a transnational space, detached from its actual location.

Just as Azerbaijan controls its own population, it also wants to suppress critical statements from beyond its borders. Domestically, outspoken critics face imprisonment. Internationally, the state has done everything in its power to put pressure on foreign diplomats to discourage criticism.

When peace activist Bahruz Samadov was taken from detention to a court hearing, his friends caught a glimpse of him. In the eight seconds he was filmed, Bahruz Samadov repeatedly cried out:

“Give me voice at COP29, give me voice at COP29, give me voice at COP29.”

Will the ethnic cleansing in Nagorno-Karabakh be overlooked, along with the human rights abuses against Azerbaijan’s own population? Only time will tell how effective Azerbaijan’s Policy of Intimidation has been.

Also see