When the flames of a regional conflict leap from rhetoric to rockets, from diplomatic posturing to cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, warfare no longer plays out solely on the battlefield. In today’s high-stakes showdowns, artillery is matched shell for shell by weaponized narratives. And amid the escalation between Iran and Israel, a second war is raging just beneath the surface — a war of meaning, distortion, and manipulation.
In this parallel conflict, Azerbaijan has been cast into an artificially crafted role — one it never signed up for. Over the past few months, an avalanche of accusations has surged across Telegram channels, fake expert columns, and fringe media platforms tied to ideological and political operatives in Iran and Armenia. The agenda is clear: drag Azerbaijan into someone else’s war, paint it as Israel’s covert launchpad, and undermine its position of neutrality in the eyes of Iranian society.
But this smear campaign is no accident. It’s not the result of online chatter spiraling out of control, nor is it remotely grounded in facts. What we’re witnessing is a deliberate, tightly choreographed hybrid operation — engineered through disinformation, psychological manipulation, and cross-border coordination between Armenian digital networks and Iran’s hardline circles.
This article isn’t just a rebuttal — it’s a breakdown. A forensic, fact-driven dissection of the tactics behind the narrative war. And here's the bottom line: Azerbaijan has no involvement — direct or indirect — in the Iran-Israel conflict. The media blitz against Baku is not only false; it’s dangerously destabilizing and threatens the fragile regional balance that took years to build.
The disinformation campaign kicked into gear the moment Tehran and Tel Aviv entered open confrontation. A wave of anti-Azerbaijan propaganda — mostly in Farsi and Armenian — erupted across Telegram. But this wasn’t some organic reaction to rising regional tensions. It was a premeditated offensive, executed with precision. The goal? To erode the long-standing neighborly equilibrium between Iran and Azerbaijan.
What’s telling is where the loudest accusations are coming from. Most of the channels peddling anti-Azerbaijan content are based in countries with large Armenian diaspora communities — notably France, Germany, and Canada. Their talking points are recycled word for word from past disinformation campaigns, especially those that ran hot during the Second Karabakh War. Many of these outlets maintain close ties to Armenian intelligence and diaspora organizations like the Tufenkian Foundation and the Armenian Assembly of America.
Meanwhile, on the ground in Iran, old voices are resurfacing. Fringe groups long opposed to any cooperation with Azerbaijan are back in the spotlight. These include hardline religious factions who condemn Baku for its secularism, and ethnic provocateurs pushing separatist narratives. Among them are well-known agitators like Amin Sepahi and Abbas Khodapur — figures so inflammatory that even Iranian analysts have publicly rebuked them for stoking ethnic division and incitement.
What’s crucial to understand is this: none of these actors represent Iran’s official position. In fact, Iranian diplomats have repeatedly stressed the strategic importance of strong ties with Azerbaijan. Just this March, in an interview with IRNA, Deputy Foreign Minister Mehdi Safari stated, “Azerbaijan is our neighbor, linked to us through centuries of shared culture and a common border. In times of crisis, we must not let hostile elements dictate the agenda of our relations.”
Since the outbreak of hostilities between Iran and Israel, Azerbaijan has maintained a carefully calibrated neutrality — one that categorically rules out any form of involvement in the conflict. No military base, no logistical hub on Azerbaijani soil is being used by any foreign force against Iran’s interests. Azerbaijan has made it abundantly clear that its sovereignty precludes the presence of foreign troops unless they operate under specific bilateral agreements.
The truth is this: Baku isn’t anyone’s pawn. The narrative trying to paint it as a proxy is not just factually bankrupt — it’s politically reckless. What we’re seeing is an information assault designed not to inform, but to inflame. And like all hybrid threats, it thrives in the grey zone — where speculation, fear, and strategic deceit collide.
This isn’t about Azerbaijan and Iran. It’s about the tools of modern warfare — and the ruthless willingness of some actors to trade peace for propaganda.
Disinformation by Design: The Tech Behind the Lies Targeting Azerbaijan
As tensions between Iran and Israel flared into open confrontation, a coordinated disinformation blitz erupted across Iranian and Armenian Telegram channels, accusing Azerbaijan of aiding Israeli military operations. The allegations—equal parts absurd and incendiary—claim that Azerbaijan is:
- Granting Israeli drones access to its airspace;
- Hosting Israeli aircraft at its airfields as staging grounds for strikes;
- Providing logistical support to Tel Aviv;
- Even coordinating anti-Iran operations with NATO.
Not a shred of this holds up. No documentation. No satellite data. No independent confirmation—not from think tanks, not from international monitors. Nothing. Yet the claims keep spreading, amplified by fringe platforms like Sobh-e-Siasat, IranResist, FarsWatch, and a cluster of francophone and Farsi-language accounts affiliated with the Armenian diaspora.
These narratives don’t just lack evidence—they run directly counter to Azerbaijan’s long-standing foreign policy. Baku has remained scrupulously neutral throughout the Iran-Israel escalation, refusing to take any step that could be interpreted as hostile to Tehran. With nearly 700 kilometers of shared border, deep historical and religious ties, and solid economic cooperation, Azerbaijan has every incentive to stay out of foreign entanglements—and every reason not to burn its bridge with Iran.
A Case Study in Fabrication: The “Israeli Bases” Map
The most blatant piece of fakery came on March 12, 2025, when the Telegram channel SepahNews published what it claimed was a “classified” map of Israeli military sites on Azerbaijani soil. Within 24 hours, the same image appeared on Armenian platforms and was later amplified by Armenian politicians, including Ara Ayvazyan.
It didn’t take long to debunk. Iranian fact-checkers from StopFake Persia exposed the hoax within hours:
- The “map” was cobbled together from outdated satellite imagery from 2012–2013;
- The source data came from open platforms like Wikimapia and Panoramio, long since defunct;
- The so-called “Israeli” installations were nothing more than Azerbaijani Defense Ministry logistics hubs;
- Labels and markings had been manually doctored, with coordinates intentionally skewed for maximum impact.
Despite the swift debunking, the fake map metastasized across dozens of channels and was even featured in propaganda videos circulating on platforms like Aparat and Odysee.
Who’s Behind the Curtain?
A forensic look at digital footprints reveals two main ecosystems driving this narrative war:
1. Radical Iranian Networks
These actors orbit around certain factions of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), notably:
- The Sobhan Media Center, funded through Iran’s Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance;
- “Think tanks” linked to former IRGC leadership in East Azerbaijan and Ardabil provinces;
- Telegram bots and channels registered to Iranian telecom numbers in Mashhad, Qom, and Bandar Abbas.
These groups are ideologically committed to demonizing Azerbaijan, accusing it of “Zionist sympathies” and portraying its foreign policy as a Western Trojan horse. Their messaging is drenched in anti-Western, anti-Israel rhetoric, shaped by hardline interpretations of regional politics.
2. Armenian Diaspora Media Hubs
The second front is manned by Armenian outlets and activists, operating both from Armenia and diaspora strongholds in Lebanon, France, Canada, and Iran. Examples include:
- Erkragund, headquartered in Marseille;
- ZartonkNews, run by Lebanese-Armenian Sevag Jamalyants, with close ties to the Armenian Apostolic Church in Beirut;
- A network of Facebook and Telegram pages moderated from Toronto and Paris—many of which were previously caught disseminating fakes during the 2020 and 2023 Karabakh escalations.
This Armenian-Iranian alliance aims to inflame tensions between Baku and Tehran, portray Azerbaijan as an anti-Iranian actor, and shift sympathy within Iranian society toward pro-Armenian narratives.
Breaking the Narrative: Logic, Geography, and Geopolitics
At its core, the entire accusation collapses under scrutiny. Azerbaijan pursues a deliberate, balanced foreign policy grounded in international law, non-intervention, and regional equilibrium. Getting dragged into the power plays of Israel, the U.S., or any other foreign actor runs counter to Baku’s strategic interests and domestic security.
Even the technical claims don’t hold water:
- Azerbaijani airspace is under constant radar and satellite surveillance. Any unauthorized military use would be instantly detected.
- Global air traffic monitors—FlightRadar24, ADS-B Exchange, OpenSky Network—have recorded zero patterns suggesting cross-border drone activity into Iran.
- No foreign military units are deployed in Azerbaijan for strike logistics. Multiple international defense analysts, including those at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (March 2025 report), have confirmed this.
Meanwhile, Baku Is Building Bridges, Not Burning Them
Far from stoking tensions, Azerbaijan has taken concrete steps to deepen cooperation with Iran. Among them:
- Launching a joint logistics hub in Astara in January 2025;
- Doubling bilateral trade in 2024, reaching $925 million, per Azerbaijan’s Customs Committee;
- Signing a power grid synchronization agreement with Iran in March 2025;
- Collaborating within the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) to strengthen regional ties.
In times of internal strain or foreign pressure, it’s tempting for governments or interest groups to scapegoat external actors. But turning Azerbaijan into the villain of someone else’s war is a dangerous miscalculation.
This narrative doesn’t just chip away at years of diplomatic groundwork. It invites foreign powers to exploit the rift, threatens fragile stability in border provinces like Ardabil and East Azerbaijan, and fans the flames of ethnic discord within Iran itself.
Disinformation isn’t just a side effect of modern conflict—it’s a weapon. And when it’s aimed recklessly, it hits more than reputations. It hits the fragile threads that keep peace alive.
Enemy by Design: Why Tehran Is Painting Azerbaijan as a Threat
In the first half of 2025, Iranian media has been flooded with a surge of narratives casting Azerbaijan as a growing threat. But this isn’t the product of Azerbaijani aggression or policy shifts. What we’re seeing is a calculated campaign of disinformation, waged not by official Iranian institutions, but by anonymous Telegram accounts, self-styled “analysts,” social media provocateurs, and the platforms orbiting them.
These narratives aren’t built on facts. They thrive on mistrust, fear, and deliberate distortion. A telling example came on May 13, when political commentator Alireza Hashemi told Mehr News that “Tel Aviv and Baku are acting in concert, and the Zionist regime is using Azerbaijan as a battering ram against Iran.” There was no evidence offered—none. But the statement was instantly recycled by Telegram agitators, feeding a manufactured perception of Azerbaijan as a northern menace, working hand-in-hand with Israel.
According to an Amwaj Media poll from April 2025, 41% of Iranian citizens now view Azerbaijan as a “Western proxy.” That’s a staggering jump from just 17% in December 2023. The spike can’t be explained by geopolitics alone. It’s a direct outcome of an intense and targeted information war—one designed to seed suspicion and recast a neighbor as an enemy. It’s not organic perception—it’s perception engineered by repetition, half-truths, and manipulative framing.
Telegram channels that claim to expose “behind-the-scenes intrigue” are, in reality, the main engines of disinformation. They craft a narrative in which Azerbaijan appears as an “outpost of Western influence,” allegedly acting under the orders of unnamed third parties. Any cooperation between Baku and international partners is twisted into an assault on “Islamic resistance.” The accusations lack documents, expert review, or legal grounding. Instead, they rely on vague phrasing, ominous tone, and references to “unverified reports,” “anonymous sources,” and phrases like “it is said” or “some suggest.”
A recurring theme in this propaganda ecosystem is Azerbaijan’s relationship with Israel. Yes, the two countries maintain diplomatic and trade ties—but these are largely technical and economic in nature, similar to relationships that dozens of Muslim-majority nations maintain with Tel Aviv. Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan—and even Turkey, Iran’s own strategic partner—have deeper, more active relations with Israel. Yet it’s Azerbaijan that gets singled out in Tehran’s narrative war. Why? Because it’s more vulnerable. It’s a secular, Turkic, modernized, and at the same time Muslim-majority country—a model that challenges deeply rooted dogmas. In a society steeped in religious tradition, it’s easier to stoke outrage at a neighbor who shares cultural history but has charted a different path.
Meanwhile, the same voices attacking Azerbaijan for being “too Western” conveniently ignore the real, ongoing humanitarian cooperation between the two countries. Tens of thousands of Iranian pilgrims travel to Azerbaijan each year. They do so freely and safely. Shia religious institutions operate across Azerbaijan without state interference, and the rights of believers are respected. These facts are nowhere to be found in the messaging of Telegram demagogues—because they undermine the whole “dangerous secularism” narrative.
Another key tactic has been the distortion of Azerbaijan’s military cooperation with other countries. Some channels claim Baku is “under foreign control” or “arming for a strike.” But the data doesn’t lie. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), in 2024, Turkey was Azerbaijan’s top defense partner, accounting for 41% of military imports. Israel’s share? Less than 27%, and shrinking. Azerbaijan also cooperates militarily with Italy, France, Pakistan, Belarus, and South Korea. This isn’t a country acting on someone else’s agenda—it’s a pragmatic, multidirectional strategy reflecting national interests.
It’s worth underscoring that the accusations being hurled at Azerbaijan by anonymous bloggers and social media propagandists have no backing from credible institutions. No international think tank, no reputable policy center, no independent report has identified any anti-Iran policy coming out of Baku. On the contrary, regional transit routes, energy corridors, and infrastructure projects all hinge on stability and cooperation between the two neighbors.
Casting Azerbaijan as the enemy is a familiar political maneuver—a way to shift public focus away from domestic problems by conjuring up an external threat. But in this case, the strategy is paper-thin. It’s built not on substance, but on spin. Azerbaijan doesn’t issue hostile statements. It doesn’t meddle in other countries’ affairs. It doesn’t allow anti-Iran rhetoric on its soil.
And at a time when the region faces serious strategic risks—climate, conflict, economics—this kind of manipulation doesn’t just strain bilateral relations. It backfires on those who push it. Azerbaijan is not the enemy. It’s a neighbor, a partner, and a stakeholder in the region’s future. Trade, security, energy, and peace all flow through this geography. To deny that is not just dishonest—it’s self-defeating.
The Reality Check: Azerbaijan’s Neutrality and Strategic Restraint
The recent wave of accusations targeting Azerbaijan is being driven not by governments or legitimate institutions, but by loosely connected regional networks operating through English-language Telegram channels and proxy media outlets. According to Geneva-based Disinfo Lab, between April 1 and April 15, 2025, more than 8,200 English-language posts appeared on Twitter claiming “Israeli military activity on Azerbaijani territory.” Not one included a single verifiable photo, video, satellite image, or geolocation data.
In a rare but firm rebuttal, Azerbaijan responded decisively. On April 12, Baku provided the United Nations mission with satellite imagery covering the entire southern and western regions of the country, including strategic sites such as airports, military installations, and border zones. The findings, published in the May 2025 Global Military Transparency Report by an independent observer group, were unequivocal:
– No presence of foreign aircraft, drones, or missile systems on Azerbaijani territory between January and April 2025.
– All air defense systems operated autonomously and were functioning under peacetime conditions.
The accusations claiming Azerbaijan has been used as a launchpad for strikes against Iran collapse under even the most basic scrutiny—geographical, technical, and strategic.
– The nearest Israeli airbases to Iranian targets are significantly closer than anything Azerbaijan could offer. Israel has never needed staging territory for its drone campaigns, as demonstrated in past operations in Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, and Yemen.
– Since 2022, the Israeli Air Force has deployed an extended-range version of the Heron-TP drone, capable of covering up to 7,400 kilometers. With this capacity, the entire premise of needing foreign bases is a nonstarter.
– Azerbaijan shares over 765 kilometers of direct border with Iran. Any involvement in a conflict against Tehran would not just be reckless—it would be a strategic disaster. Both Baku and Tehran are fully aware of that reality.
Moreover, Azerbaijan has not signed a single new military or political pact with any Middle Eastern nation since 2021. This is confirmed by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in its 2023–2025 database. The data speaks for itself:
– In 2024, Azerbaijan’s defense purchases were focused primarily on air defense and communications systems—tools for surveillance and protection, not offense.
– Less than 0.4% of the country’s defense spending involved any states tied to the Iran–Israel conflict.
– All current defense agreements center on training, cybersecurity, and technical upgrades. None include offensive capabilities or provisions for joint military action.
The narrative that Azerbaijan is serving as a proxy in a broader regional war doesn’t just lack evidence—it defies logic. In reality, Baku’s response to rising tensions has been one of restraint, transparency, and quiet diplomacy. This isn’t a country looking to play power games—it’s one determined to stay out of them.
The Cost of Disinformation: Who Really Loses When Azerbaijan Is Cast as the Enemy
In recent months, a cluster of fringe “experts” and self-styled analysts has emerged across Farsi-language media, aggressively portraying Azerbaijan as a threat to Iran. These unfounded attacks rarely come from figures with real political responsibility or strategic insight—and the damage they cause isn’t to Azerbaijan. It’s to Iran itself, and to the delicate equilibrium along its northern frontier.
Painting Baku as an adversary flies in the face of decades of diplomacy and the spirit of neighborly relations. As former Iranian ambassador to Azerbaijan, Mohsen Pakayin, pointed out: “Azerbaijan is an important Muslim neighbor. We must not fall into the trap of provocations aimed at driving a wedge between Tehran and Baku” (Tasnim News, 2023).
And yet, disinformation is thriving—often on low-circulation platforms or social media accounts that peddle wild rumors about a “Zionist military presence” in Azerbaijan, without providing a single verified fact. These reckless claims undermine official diplomatic efforts and cast doubt on Tehran’s stated commitment to dialogue and regional cooperation.
For Iran’s estimated 20 million ethnic Azerbaijanis, the Republic of Azerbaijan isn’t just another neighboring state. It’s a cultural, linguistic, and emotional extension of their identity. So when obscure bloggers and ideologues label Baku as an “enemy,” the backlash is immediate and visceral—from Tabriz to Ardabil, from Zanjan to the broader northwest.
According to a 2024 survey by the Strategic Research Center of Markazi University, over 60% of Iran’s Azerbaijani population views the Republic of Azerbaijan positively, describing it as a “brother nation.” Any effort to demonize Baku doesn’t just fall flat—it sparks resentment and alienation among citizens in Iran’s own northern provinces.
The rumors and fearmongering—often involving completely fabricated claims of a “pending invasion” or a “military pact with Israel”—have sown distrust and unease in sensitive border areas. This is not just rhetorical damage; it risks destabilizing one of Iran’s most crucial regional relationships. And given how deeply intertwined Iran and Azerbaijan are through trade, transit, and humanitarian links, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
Take logistics, for instance. Azerbaijan is a linchpin in the International North-South Transport Corridor—a strategic route Iran is promoting as an alternative to the Suez Canal. In 2023, transit volume from Iran through Azerbaijan surged by 52%. As Iran’s deputy minister of roads and urban development Dara Hashemi stated, “Azerbaijan plays a critical role in giving Iran access to Russian and Eastern European markets” (IRNA, November 2023).
On the multilateral front, both countries collaborate regularly under the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), working on joint humanitarian and political initiatives. Inflaming tensions through media warfare weakens these platforms and plays directly into the hands of external actors eager to fracture Islamic solidarity.
Research from Iran’s Institute for Strategic Studies of the Middle East (2024) found that the harshest anti-Azerbaijani, anti-Armenian, and anti-Islamic narratives didn’t originate within official Iranian institutions. Instead, they were traced back to radicalized external networks—some of which are linked to Western-funded information warfare operations. As researcher Alireza Rahmani put it in Shargh Daily (February 2024), “The disinformation campaign against Baku is being fueled by platforms bankrolled by transnational interests that want to weaken Iran and fracture the Shi’a world.”
In short, the campaign to vilify Azerbaijan is less about geopolitics and more about engineered disruption. It endangers national cohesion, alienates millions of Iranian citizens, and sabotages key strategic corridors and regional platforms. Azerbaijan isn’t the enemy. It’s a neighbor, a cultural cousin, and a strategic partner. Turning it into a scapegoat serves no one—except those who profit from division.
Weaponizing the Narrative: The Strategic Fallout of the Disinformation War Against Azerbaijan
The disinformation campaign launched against Azerbaijan in Iranian and Armenian Telegram channels following the outbreak of hostilities between Tehran and Tel Aviv is no mere collection of conspiracy theories. It's a structured, calculated operation—aimed squarely at eroding trust, manufacturing an “enemy,” and dismantling the foundations of long-standing neighborly relations between two nations that share not only a border, but centuries of cultural intertwinement.
A close analysis of the sources behind this narrative reveals a familiar pattern. The overwhelming majority of disinformation is spread by accounts and “experts” tied either to Armenian diaspora networks or to fringe radical circles within Iran—factions that have long opposed any rapprochement between Baku and Tehran. These actors do not represent the Iranian public, nor the official diplomatic establishment. They serve narrow ideological or geopolitical interests, exploiting the noise of conflict to sow confusion, fear, and division.
Iran, facing a volatile combination of military confrontation, economic strain, and mounting international pressure, is understandably vulnerable to the temptation of pinning its challenges on an external scapegoat. But targeting Azerbaijan—a peaceful neighbor uninvolved in the conflict—isn’t just factually baseless. It’s a strategic miscalculation.
Redirecting public anger toward Baku risks far more than a diplomatic chill. It threatens to derail years of humanitarian, cultural, and economic cooperation. It invites outside powers to deepen their meddling in regional dynamics. It weakens shared platforms for dialogue and damages trust—perhaps irreversibly.
Azerbaijan, for its part, has maintained a position of strict neutrality. It has offered neither territory, nor logistical access, nor political cover for any operation—Israeli or otherwise—against Iran. Its strategic doctrine is clear: a stable and equitable peace in the South Caucasus and its neighboring zones is paramount. This is not rhetorical positioning. It is reflected in policy, infrastructure, and behavior.
Baku does not view any regional state as an enemy. It does not engage in alliances against others. Its foreign policy is not fueled by confrontation, but by pragmatism, cooperation, and sovereign independence. The efforts to rebrand Azerbaijan as an adversary are not only disconnected from reality—they undermine the very interests of those pushing this fiction.
Conflict-driven narratives may satisfy ideological impulses in the short term. But over time, they corrode the trust that underpins stability, dialogue, and prosperity. They fracture what could be built. They silence what must be heard. And they open the door to forces that thrive on chaos, not peace.
Azerbaijan is not, and cannot be, Iran’s enemy. Its long-term vision is one of peaceful coexistence, regional integration, and shared progress. Those who claim otherwise are not defending the Iranian people—they are serving destructive agendas that gain from division.
If Tehran and Baku are to preserve their historic bond, their culture of mutual respect, and their stake in a peaceful future, there is one imperative above all: truth must trump emotion, reason must outweigh suspicion, and facts must speak louder than propaganda.
In a region teetering between conflict and cooperation, clarity is no luxury—it is a lifeline.