In Azerbaijan, Border Closures Fuel Tensions and Public Mistrust

President Ilham Aliyev's recent address to the National Assembly served as yet another stark reminder of Azerbaijan’s complex geopolitical situation. The President spoke candidly about ongoing ideological and geopolitical provocations from abroad and the need to strengthen national defense. However, it was his remarks on the continued closure of Azerbaijan’s land borders that sparked the most intense discussions in political circles.

The President noted that the closures, which have been in effect for several years, have protected the country from “great calamities” and external threats. However, many in the country are unconvinced by the official justification that the restrictions are pandemic-related. ASTNA met with Khaladdin Ibrahimli, an experienced political analyst and frequent commentator on regional dynamics, to understand what this policy signals about Azerbaijan’s domestic and international position.

* * *

Question: Haladdin Bey, President Ilham Aliyev suggested that foreign circles, unable to accept Azerbaijan’s victory in the Second Karabakh War, are preparing new plans against the country. How credible is this claim? Are such plans really being made, and if so, who are these foreign actors?

Answer: This is not just political rhetoric; it is, unfortunately, a reality we must contend with. Although the President did not specifically name these countries, the actors are known to anyone who has closely followed the developments during and after the war. For example, the appearance of F-16 fighter jets in Azerbaijan during the conflict was widely interpreted as a message to Iran. Iran, France, Russia, and India—all of these countries have shown a degree of discomfort with the new status quo in the region.

Russia, for instance, should not be allowed to open a consulate in Khankendi, while Iran should be kept out of the Zangezur corridor—a strictly internal matter between Azerbaijan and Armenia. France must not be permitted to facilitate the return of Armenians to Khankendi, and we cannot allow India or Iran to arm Armenia. These are red lines, and crossing them would undermine our hard-won peace.

Question: The President also emphasized that, despite the conclusion of the war, Azerbaijan’s military power will continue to be strengthened. Is this an indication that Azerbaijan is preparing for another conflict?

Answer: Azerbaijan has no intention of starting another war, but the country’s geography and geopolitical context dictate that it must remain vigilant. Our region is fraught with conflicting interests, and unfortunately, apart from Turkey, we have no genuinely friendly neighbors. Both Armenia and Georgia are susceptible to being used by distant powers against us. This has been a reality for decades, and I have repeatedly emphasized this in my writings since the 1990s. Our national security demands that we maintain a robust military capability.

Question: President Aliyev touched upon the continued closure of land borders and linked it to security concerns. Could the closures truly be about national security, or is there another explanation?

Answer: The reality is far more complex. I expect that the land borders will only reopen once the Russia-Ukraine war concludes. However, the official narrative that the border closures are due to the pandemic is deeply problematic. The Prime Minister reiterated this just recently, but 99% of the population knows this isn’t true. Making such a statement when everyone is aware of the truth is not only disrespectful to the public—it’s outright insulting. You cannot treat people like this. It upsets me deeply.

If the closures were truly about security, then it would make sense to keep the Georgian border open. This would benefit both our compatriots living there and facilitate Turkey’s connections via Georgia. Someone might then argue: “Why are you keeping the border closed with me?” referring to Iran. But that’s not a valid question. Iran has been increasingly hostile, amassing troops and equipment along our border to intimidate us. Our policy towards Iran must be clear and transparent.

Question: You mentioned that Iran’s recent actions include a military buildup near Azerbaijan’s borders. What are the implications of this for Azerbaijan’s foreign policy?

Answer: Iran has been trying to send a clear message through these military maneuvers: it is unhappy with Azerbaijan’s post-war position and our close ties with Turkey and Israel. Tehran has been using various channels, including its religious and cultural networks, to influence perceptions within Azerbaijan. This is why I have always advocated for a very open and transparent policy toward Iran. There are 40 million ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran who must be made aware of Tehran’s true intentions, so that the mullahs’ propaganda does not mislead them.

Iran’s behavior is not only a challenge for Azerbaijan’s foreign policy but also a direct threat to our internal stability. Our stance should be firm and principled. We cannot allow Tehran to undermine our sovereignty or dictate our regional policies.

Question: You have suggested that the closure of land borders is a broader issue of political control. Could you elaborate?

Answer: The government’s insistence on keeping borders closed—while attributing it to the pandemic—has fueled public mistrust. Some believe it’s part of a larger plan to isolate the country, control the population, and limit the flow of information and people. This perception is dangerous because it erodes confidence in the government’s statements. If this issue isn’t resolved transparently, it could have long-term consequences for the relationship between the state and its citizens.

Question: Where does Azerbaijan go from here? Is there a path to de-escalation with its neighbors and a more open political climate domestically?

Answer: Azerbaijan’s strategic position will always require a delicate balancing act between its own interests and those of its neighbors. De-escalation is possible, but it requires that our neighbors—especially Iran and Russia—respect our sovereignty. Domestically, the government must be more transparent about its policies, particularly when it comes to sensitive issues like border closures. Only then can we strengthen national unity and build a more resilient state.