Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Moscow Admits: Air Defense Downed Azerbaijani Plane. But "Settlement" — Without Trial or Punishment

Russia and Azerbaijan signed a joint statement on compensation for the J2-8243 flight disaster. The document closes the financial matter but leaves unanswered what Baku has been demanding for over a year: criminal liability for specific individuals.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 15, 2026 · 3 min read

Moscow Admits: Air Defense Downed Azerbaijani Plane. But "Settlement" — Without Trial or Punishment
Місце катастрофи літака AZAL (Фото: EPA/Azamat Sarsenbayev)

On December 25, 2024, an Embraer 190 of Azerbaijan Airlines (AZAL) was flying from Baku to Grozny. It was shot down by a Russian air defense system — the plane crashed near the Kazakh city of Aktau. Of 67 people on board, 38 died. Moscow initially spoke of a collision with birds.

What Was Signed

On April 15, the Foreign Ministries of Azerbaijan and Russia published a joint statement. It contained an admission: the catastrophe occurred as a result of "unintentional action of the air defense system in the airspace of the Russian Federation". The parties, according to the document, reached an "appropriate settlement of consequences, including the issue of compensation payments."

"The steps taken confirm the mutual desire for further mutually beneficial cooperation within the framework of allied interaction."

Joint statement of the Foreign Ministries of Azerbaijan and Russia, April 15

The statement refers to agreements reached during a meeting between Presidents Aliyev and Putin in Dushanbe on October 9, 2025 — effectively recording an agreement prepared six months earlier.

The Money Is There — The Mechanism Is Vague

Even before the statement was signed, Russian insurer AlfaStrakhovanie from February 2025 had paid AZAL 1.003 billion rubles (~$12.3 million) as the insurance value of the aircraft, and to the families of the deceased and injured passengers — 358.4 million rubles (~$4.4 million). This covered 46 of 62 passengers.

However, the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry in September 2025 publicly rejected Moscow's attempt to count these payments as "compensation." Spokesman Aykhan Hajizade explained: insurance is an obligation under AZAL's contract with the Russian company, not an acknowledgment of state responsibility. "Equating insurance payments with the compensation that Azerbaijan demands from the Russian government is incorrect," he emphasized.

The current joint statement does not disclose either the amount of state compensation, the timeline, or the mechanism for verifying payments.

What Is Missing From the Document

For more than a year, President Aliyev had formulated three demands: Russia's acknowledgment of guilt, punishment of the specific military personnel who gave the order and carried out the launch, and full compensation. The Azerbaijani Prosecutor's Office repeatedly sent requests to Russia's Investigative Committee — without response. According to data from Azerbaijani publication Minval, the commander of the unit that shot down the plane received a promotion after the catastrophe.

  • No public criminal prosecution has been initiated in Russia.
  • The joint statement does not contain the word "liability" — only "unintentional action."
  • The issue of punishment for those responsible is absent from the document.

Before signing the statement — in July 2025 — Baku announced preparations for lawsuits in international courts. Aliyev directly compared the situation to the downing of MH17, after which international bodies established Russia's responsibility following many years of proceedings.

Diplomatic Mathematics

For Moscow, the statement is beneficial: it defuses the acute crisis in relations with Baku without acknowledging state criminal responsibility. For Aliyev — it is a partial saving of face: the acknowledgment of the fact of the shooting is recorded in writing, the financial issue is closed. But the third demand — punishment of specific individuals — is not mentioned in the document at all.

If Baku has genuinely renounced the requirement for criminal prosecution, "settlement" means: the state acknowledged a technical error, but not a legal crime. If not — the question of a lawsuit to international bodies remains open, despite the signed document.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026