Introduction: Update on recent events in Azerbaijan
Since last week The Azerbaijani regime has escalated its brutal crackdown on dissent with the arbitrary detention of Bahruz Samadov, a distinguished scholar and anti-war activist, as well as increasing the charges against other already detained activists, journalists, and scholars. They further kidnapped Samad Shikhi, another anti-war activist and writer, at the airport and interrogated him in relation to Bahruz Samadov's case. Samad is free now. Bahruz is in four months pre-trial detention and is facing bogus treason charges. More people are expected to be arrested or interrogated.
This is not just another routine silencing. It is a calculated assault on anyone who dares to stand against the authoritarian grip of the regime. And it is important to acknowledge that the Azerbaijani regime's repression has a systematic and repetitive character. The most recent wave took place in 2014 following crisis in oil market and plummeted oil revenues of the regime infused with the fear of domino effect of Arab uprisings in the region. That time the independent civil society was destroyed, draconian law on grants and registration of non-governmental organizations were adopted practically destroying political environment. We have been facing somewhat similar wave since 2023, as independent activists, scholars, media and anyone who dares to challenge or disagree with dictatorial rule is in danger.
The current attack follows the full victory of Azerbaijani regime over Nagorno-Karabakh and exodus of Armenians. While many naive voices were expecting liberalisation after the forceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the opposite and logically expected outcome happened. The regime felt full card-blanche to do whatever they want. Starting from July 2023 independent actors became target.
It is worth to remind that there is no need to seek for a specific reason for the Azerbaijani authorities to execute this crack down. The main motivation and slogan for this regime is "kill the democracy in cradle". What was keeping them before from such drastic actions is more or less balance in international relations and due to this desire to save its image. Azerbaijan's U-turn in foreign policy from balanced politics to openly picking sides and seeking the alliance with similar authoritarian regimes, also hypocrisy and indifference of Western democracies which continue to cooperate with Azerbaijan empowered them to purge the independent civil society remaining scot-free.
In a three-part post, we would like to outline potential reasons of why this purge is happening and scenarios of further development. We would like to emphasize that some of our analysis are based on real concerns. We also do not want to stay aside as many political analysts did in 2020 in Karabakh war and 2022 in Ukraine war excluding war and invasion.
We do not think methods of classic rational cost-benefit analysis that political analysts adhere to work on dictators. We especially acknowledge that that cost and benefits for dictators is of our limited awareness. Our main vector of analysis for dictators that we can rely on is the desire to keep power at all costs and paranoia which is following this fear.
Part 1: "Traitor-Armenian": The Eternal Hunt for an Internal Enemy
How can a government that claims to pursue peace simultaneously criminalize those who call for it?
In Azerbaijan, advocating for peace or engaging in dialogue with Armenians has long been equated with traitor — a stigma that has shadowed civil society since the 1990s. Figures like Leyla Yunus, who dared to break the silence and reach across the conflict divide, were swiftly branded as traitors, cast as enemies of the "people-motherland-state" trinity. This weaponization of the "treacherous Armenian" narrative has persisted and even deepened over time, reflecting a deliberate strategy to marginalize those who question the state’s militaristic consensus. During the 2020 war, as nationalist fervor and state-led fascism reached new heights, a small but vocal group of anti-war activists emerged. Though they posed no real threat to the regime, their mere existence was intolerable because it disrupted the state’s image of total unity. In a climate where conformity is enforced and dissent criminalized, these peace advocates were transformed into internal enemies—the ultimate scapegoats for a government that thrives on creating perpetual fear.
The Paradox of Peace Talks and Repression
The landscape of the conflict has undoubtedly evolved since the 2020 war. Azerbaijan has secured many of its objectives on the battlefield and in the diplomatic arena, yet the regime’s hostility toward peace advocates has only intensified. The irony could not be more glaring: while Baku engages in so-called "normalization" talks with Yerevan, those who champion peace within Azerbaijan are persecuted, branded as traitors. This contradiction begs the question: How can a government that claims to pursue peace simultaneously criminalize those who call for it?
The answer lies in the regime’s deep-seated paranoia. The regime does not tolerate any independent initiatives. For decades they tried to keep under the control the peace processes suppressing any independent grassroots, pushing them towards low-key activities. This time, social media changed the rules of the game. People escaped the Great Eye of Sauron and connected disregarding Aliyev's controlling gaze. However, it did not take long time for the regime to adopt. They created parallel processes of dialogues, exchange programs and infiltrated independent groups with their trolls.
Moreover, the ongoing peace talks are merely a facade—a diplomatic maneuver designed to placate international observers while maintaining the underlying readiness for renewed war. The current wave of repression is not an aberration but rather a continuation of the authoritarian crackdown that began last year. Journalists, researchers, and activists are being systematically targeted as part of a larger strategy to silence dissent and solidify the government’s grip on power. The repressive machinery is fueled by the regime’s own fears and insecurities, operating under the grim logic that those who dare to challenge the narrative must be crushed.
The Dictator’s Paranoia: Fear and Insecurity as a Governance Strategy
For Aliyev, the fear of losing power is all-consuming, driving him into a spiral of paranoia reminiscent of dictators throughout history. The memory of Armenia’s 2018 Velvet Revolution still haunts him; the sight of Azerbaijanis, despite their hostility toward Armenia, being inspired by their neighbor’s courage was a nightmare scenario. The mere possibility of a similar uprising in Azerbaijan was enough to plant the seeds of deep distrust within the regime. Now, Aliyev sees enemies everywhere: the West, civil society, and even within his own ranks. His governance has devolved into a cynical synthesis of fear and insecurity, a recipe that breeds anger and further repression.
The government’s narrative is both simplistic and tired: "The danger is everywhere." Armenians, Western NGOs, and so-called foreign agents—these are the specters invoked to justify the state’s ever-tightening grip. The regime plays on the anxiety of a nation scarred by war, using nationalism as a smokescreen to distract from its own corruption and failures. But this narrative, while effective in the short term, cannot mask the reality that the regime is losing control over its own paranoia. Aliyev’s obsession with preserving his power at all costs is driving him to increasingly irrational and brutal measures. He is aware that the precarious socioeconomic conditions, the poverty, and the systemic lack of social security have left a large segment of the population vulnerable and resentful. Rather than address these grievances, the regime exploits them, keeping the masses in a state of constant anxiety to maintain its hold on power.
The Futility of Crushing Dissent
Here lies the paradox of Aliyev’s strategy: his fears are justified, but his response is self-defeating. The regime’s attempt to eliminate civil society as the primary source of potential resistance will ultimately backfire. History has shown many times and again that where there is power, there will be resistance. This struggle does not have to manifest in the form of NGOs or formal activism—those can be easily dismantled. What the regime fails to grasp is that dissent cannot be crushed by brute force alone. When the state relies on violence and repression to impose conformity, it only deepens the underlying tensions that fuel resistance. The very tactics employed to suppress dissent are, in fact, nurturing the seeds of future unrest. The unrest that will be in a form that Aliyev and his entourage are not able to grasp.
Aliyev’s paranoia drives him to view even the smallest acts of dissent as existential threats, but this approach is fundamentally flawed. The regime may succeed in temporarily silencing its critics, but the deeper currents of resistance will continue to flow beneath the surface. By attacking peace-builders and civil society with such fervor, Aliyev and his government are making a choice. But this is a choice born out of delusion, a failure to recognize that repression is a temporary fix, not a long-term solution.
In the end, it’s not the peace-builders or civil society who are on trial; it’s Aliyev and his oppressive regime. They are the ones who have turned those seeking dialogue into enemies. They are the ones who have weaponized fear and hatred to sustain their power. And it is they who must now grapple with the consequences of their paranoia. The more they suppress, the more inevitable the backlash becomes. The regime’s attempt to maintain control by stoking nationalism and hunting down "internal enemies" is unsustainable. Eventually, the contradictions will catch up, and the facade of unity will crack.
Aliyev’s relentless pursuit of control through repression is a strategy doomed to fail. The peace-builders and civil society that the regime so desperately fears are not going away. In fact, by labeling them as enemies, the government is only solidifying their role as symbols of resistance. The struggle for genuine peace and democracy in Azerbaijan is far from over—it is merely entering a new phase, one where the regime’s paranoia will be met with a more determined and resilient opposition.
To be continued...
Comments