Azerbaijan detains 7 linked to a Russian media outlet as a rift between Baku and Moscow deepens
Tensions have been growing since December, when an Azerbaijani passenger jet was attacked as it approached Grozny, the regional capital of the Russian republic of Chechnya, It later crashed, killing 38 of 67 people aboard, and Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev blamed Moscow and said Russian President Vladimir Putin had tried to 'hush up' what happened.
On Monday, masked police stormed the offices of Sputnik Azerbaijan. The Interior Ministry said the Kremlin-backed media outlet had continued operating via 'illegal financing,' despite having its accreditation revoked in February.
Detained in the raid were Sputnik Azerbaijan's editor-in-chief Yevgeny Belousov, and editorial board director Igor Kartavykh. Five others linked to the media outlet also were detained and under investigation for alleged fraud, illegal entrepreneurship and acquiring property by criminal means.
2 Russians ordered held for up to 4 months in Azerbaijan
Belousov and Kartavykh were charged with conspiracy to commit fraud, which carries a maximum prison sentence of up to 12 years. They also were charged with conspiracy to launder funds or other property, and conspiracy to carry out an illegal enterprise. Both were arrested and ordered held for at least four months in pre-trial detention.
Sputnik's parent company, Rossiya Segodnya, said Tuesday it was 'deeply concerned' by the raid and that Azerbaijani staff members were among those detained. Diplomats from the Russian Consulate have not been grated access to its citizens who were detained, it said, and that Kartavykh's apartment had been searched and computer equipment seized.
'All these actions have no basis and have led to the blocking of Sputnik Azerbaijan,' the statement said. 'We call on the Azerbaijani authorities to immediately resolve this unacceptable situation and release our colleagues.'
The Kremlin also called for their release.
'Such measures against members of the media are absolutely not in line with generally accepted rules and norms and, of course, do not match the spirit and nature of Russian-Azerbaijani relations,' spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday.
A police raid in Yekaterinburg, Russia
The detentions followed Russian police raids Friday on the homes of ethnic Azerbaijanis in Yekaterinburg, Russia, as part of an investigation into a number of killings dating back decades. Two brothers, Ziyaddin and Huseyn Safarov, died while in police custody and several others were seriously injured in the raids, officials said, with nine people detained.
Sayfaddin Huseynli, a brother of the two dead Azerbaijanis, told The Associated Press the raids were 'an inhumane, cruel act by Russia against migrants — an act of intimidation.'
Migrants from Muslim-majority countries that once were part of the Soviet Union frequently complain of discrimination at the hands of Russians.
On Tuesday, the Prosecutor General's Office of Azerbaijan said it would launch a criminal investigation into the two deaths. It said Azerbaijani citizens and others of Azerbaijani descent who were 'practically helpless and unable to defend themselves,' were subjected to beatings and other physical abuse by Russian officials.
It attributed the deaths of 60-year-old Huseyn Safarov and 55-year-old Ziyaddin Safarov to 'post-traumatic shock caused by multiple injuries.' Huseyn had also suffered post-hemorrhagic shock, it said.
Russia's Investigative Committee said Monday that one of the deaths had been caused by heart failure. It did not provide details on the second victim, but said a medical examination would be conducted to determine the cause of death for both.
Azerbaijan protests the deaths in custody
Azerbaijan protested the deaths by canceling a scheduled trip to Moscow by government officials, citing the 'targeted extrajudicial killings and violence against Azerbaijanis on the basis of their nationality' by Russian law enforcement. It also called off a visit to Baku by a Russian deputy prime minister, and the Culture Ministry canceled concerts, exhibitions and other events by Russian state and private institutions.
Ties between Moscow and Baku have been strained since the December crash of an Azerbaijani passenger jet. The plane eventually crashed as it tried to land in nearby Kazakhstan.
Aliyev said it was attacked over Russia, albeit unintentionally, and rendered uncontrollable by electronic warfare measures amid allegations that Russian air defense systems were trying to fend off a Ukrainian drone strike near Grozny. Putin apologized to Aliyev for what he called a 'tragic incident' but stopped short of acknowledging responsibility.
In May, Aliyev declined to attend Russia's Victory Day parade in Moscow. Later that month, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha visited Azerbaijan, signaling closer ties between Baku and Kyiv.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
How German media outlets helped pave the way for Israel's murder of journalists in Gaza
What is the role of journalism when Palestinian reporters are treated as criminals and left to die? Last October, I spoke with the journalist Hossam Shabat. He described families packing what little they had left in northern Gaza as Israel began implementing its 'generals' plan'. Six months later, Shabat was dead – killed by Israel, accused of being a Hamas operative. Israel does not try to hide these killings. Instead, it often smears its victims in advance – branding journalists as 'terrorists', accusations that are rarely substantiated. These labels serve a clear cause: to strip reporters of their civilian status and make their killing appear morally acceptable. Journalists are not legitimate targets. Killing them is a war crime. The latest round shook the world: five Al Jazeera journalists were assassinated in a press tent in Gaza City, among them Anas al-Sharif, whose face had become familiar to anyone following Gaza up close. Both the UN and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) had warned that al-Sharif's life was in danger. Weeks later, he was dead. Meanwhile, a growing consensus recognises Gaza as the site of a livestreamed genocide. Yet in Germany – a country that prides itself on having learned the lessons of its own genocidal history – some of the most powerful media institutions have played a part in enabling Israel's actions. Some German journalists have even justified the killing of their Palestinian colleagues. The clearest example is Axel Springer, Europe's largest publisher and owner of Bild, Germany's biggest newspaper. Hours after the killing of al-Sharif became public, Bild splashed his image under this headline: 'Terrorist disguised as journalist killed in Gaza' (which was later changed to 'Journalist killed was allegedly a terrorist'). Let that sink in. About a week before, Bild had published another piece: 'This Gaza photographer stages Hamas propaganda.' The article targeted the Palestinian photographer Anas Zayed Fteiha, accusing him of staging images of starving Palestinians as part of a Hamas campaign, despite the evidence that the subjects of the photos were indeed starving and waiting for food. In the article, Fteiha's title as journalist appeared in quotation marks, implying he wasn't a real journalist, and that images of starvation were exaggerated fabrications. The Bild story – along with a similar piece in the liberal Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) – was swiftly amplified on X by Israel's foreign ministry, which cited them as proof that Hamas manipulates global opinion. Fteiha was branded an 'Israel- and Jew-hater' serving Hamas. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation quickly piled on, joined by rightwing influencers. In this case, German media had become a direct pipeline for Israeli talking points, quickly recycled into the international arena and repackaged as 'evidence'. Fteiha said in response: 'I don't create suffering. I document it.' Calling his work 'Hamas propaganda', he continued, 'is a felony against the press itself'. Just days before the Bild and SZ articles were published, one of Germany's largest journalists' associations, Deutscher Journalisten-Verband (DJV), issued a statement warning of 'manipulation' in press photography. It specifically cast doubt on images showing emaciated children in Gaza, claiming their condition 'apparently is not attributable to the famine in Gaza'. The DJV offered no evidence for this claim – largely because no such evidence exists. Facing backlash online, the association cited a July article in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, whose author had speculated whether images of emaciated infants were really the result of starvation – or rather of preexisting conditions such as cystic fibrosis. The piece suggested that publications had been either negligent or manipulative in publishing these photos without further detail. Omitted was the fact that hunger and preexisting conditions can't be neatly separated and that no preexisting condition alone could produce such extreme emaciation. Bias isn't new in the German media landscape. At Axel Springer, support for the existence of the state of Israel is second on the list of the company's guiding principles, its so-called essentials. In September last year, Bild helped derail ceasefire negotiations by publishing an 'exclusive' report – excerpts from a Hamas strategy leaked to Bild by Benjamin Netanyahu's aides. In it, Bild claimed Hamas was 'not aiming for a quick end to the war', which neatly absolved Netanyahu of any responsibility for the breakdown in talks at the time. (In response to queries about the story, a Bild spokesperson told +972 magazine that the publication does not comment on its sources.) As it turned out, the Hamas document had been broadly misrepresented by Bild. The timing couldn't have served Netanyahu better: the story landed as mass protests put pressure on his position. Shortly after the Bild report was published, Netanyahu cited it in a cabinet meeting to cast the demonstrators as pawns of Hamas. The Bild article remains online, uncorrected. The problem, however, extends far beyond Bild and Axel Springer. Across legacy German media, failures to provide fact-based, balanced coverage of Israel and Palestine have been far reaching – and became glaringly obvious after the 7 October attacks. Fabricated claims, such as that Hamas had beheaded 40 babies, along with various other pieces of deliberate misinformation, remain uncorrected. Outlets across the political spectrum in Germany routinely omit historical context, frame Palestinian deaths in passive, depoliticised terms, and display a near-blind faith in Israeli military 'verification' – while ignoring a well-documented record of misinformation by Israeli state sources. In January, the ostensibly leftwing Die Tageszeitung ran a piece headlined: 'Can journalists be terrorists?' The article cited the Israeli military four times – and did not quote a single journalist in Gaza. Across the German media landscape, such narratives contribute to stripping Palestinian journalists of credibility, and – in the worst case – handing Israel readymade justifications for targeting them. Germany's 'never again' pledge should carry weight given its deeply genocidal history. Yet it rings hollow when the country's dominant outlets launder or supply propaganda to legitimise mass killing in Gaza. This is not journalism in the service of truth – it is journalism in the service of violence. Breaking this cycle would require a serious reckoning with the editorial cultures and political loyalties that have enabled German journalism to be weaponised in this way. The killing of journalists in Gaza makes one thing painfully clear: Israel does not want a record to be left. When the history of this genocide is written, there will be chapters on the media's role. Germany's section will be uncomfortably large. No one should claim they didn't see it happening. Hanno Hauenstein is a Berlin-based journalist and author. He worked as a senior editor in Berliner Zeitung's culture department, specialising in contemporary art and politics
JAMnews
4 hours ago
- JAMnews
Peace treaty text sparks mixed reactions in Baku
Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty The peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia has drawn a mixed public reaction. The 17-point document sets out opportunities for cooperation in diplomacy, the economy, culture and humanitarian affairs, while committing both sides to refrain from hostile actions. Once signed, it will require both countries to withdraw all legal claims, complaints and disputes, and to refrain from pursuing them in the future. 'Azerbaijan has made a major concession' Ilgar Mammadov | photo: Ilgar Mammadov, a politician and former chair of the Republican Alternative party, believes the draft agreement does not clearly explain why it exists or what its purpose is. He argues that while Armenia has formally renounced territorial claims, there is no guarantee other states will not support such claims in the future. Mammadov says the agreement should have made it explicit that Armenia's territorial claims led to war and deportations – otherwise, Azerbaijan is making a major concession. 'Yerevan has only formally stepped back. In the past, we could at least respond to Armenian claims with our own claim to Western Zangezur. After the agreement, if they find another patron and act on it, what argument of justice will we have in response? I'm not talking about 'rights' – those don't seem to exist – I'm talking about justice. The draft should have at least acknowledged in some way that Armenia's territorial claims opened the door to war and deportations. Otherwise, Armenia is now, as if nothing happened, negotiating with us about the future. By agreeing to this, Azerbaijan has made a huge concession. Will anyone recognise it? They should.' He also says the document is too general and puts too much faith in the good faith of future actions. 'Looking at the text, I'm not convinced peace will last – but let them sign it, and we will all try to make sure there is no more war. An agreement alone cannot guarantee that.' 'We also had to make some concessions' Elkhan Shahinoglu | photo: Political analyst Elkhan Shahinoglu takes a more pragmatic view of the document. He says that including several of Azerbaijan's demands in the Washington agreement is an important achievement. These include abolishing the Minsk Group, opening the Zangezur corridor and suspending Amendment 907. Shahinoglu says that dropping the demand for compensation for Armenia's 30-year aggression has been met with mixed reactions, but mutual concessions were inevitable. 'Obviously, in exchange for what we achieved, we also had to make some concessions. If Armenia hesitates to implement the points set out in the peace agreement, we can return to our demand for compensation. In any case, there needs to be healthy debate around this issue.' 'Hard to say what the mood in the region will be in 15–20 days' Rauf Mirgadirov | photo: Meydan TV Political analyst Rauf Mirkadirov told Meydan TV that the process of bringing the peace treaty into legal force remains uncertain. 'For the signed agreement to be ratified in Armenia, a referendum must be held and constitutional changes made. In Armenia, the referendum is expected in 2027. It is very hard to predict what the political situation in Armenia will be in two years' time – or even what the mood in the region will be in three months or in 15–20 days. The 15 August meeting between Trump and Putin should also be taken into account.' Mirkadirov said that after the 44-day war in 2020, the statement signed by Azerbaijan and Armenia with the participation of Russian president Vladimir Putin included a provision on the 'Zangezur corridor,' which was meant to be under Russian control. 'Today, that document is nothing more than a useless scrap of paper that no one recalls,' he said. 'Now, with Trump's participation, they have signed a declaration. They called it the 'Trump Path'. You see how quickly things can change.' Still, he believes the declaration signed in the US can be seen as the basis for a peace agreement. 'This transport corridor is of great importance not only for Azerbaijan, but also for the wider region – for Turkiye, Central Asia, China and the European Union.' While the published text of the peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia sets out an important legal framework for lasting peace, discussion has shown it has drawn mixed reactions among the public and experts alike. Although the deal is seen as a key step towards preventing another war, its durability will ultimately depend on future political will and mutual trust. Azerbaijan-Armenia peace treaty
Daily Mail
13 hours ago
- Daily Mail
The sad secret life of Ashley Biden: Her diary about 'showers with dad', her sex addiction and marriage confessions... as she files for divorce
At times tragic, at others tawdry, the turbulent history of the Biden clan was one that the mainstream US media was long happy to ignore. But even on those occasional moments when the family couldn't avoid unflattering attention, the one consolation for other Bidens was that at least they weren't Hunter.
