AN AIRBORNE AND POLITICAL CATASTROPHE

In early February, Azerbaijan marked 40 days since the crash of an AZAL airline flight travelling from Baku to Grozny. Thirty-eight people perished, including the crew members. Survivors continue to receive treatment in Azerbaijani hospitals. The investigation into the aviation disaster is ongoing and has already become a catalyst for a serious political crisis between Baku and Moscow.

Preliminary report with final conclusions

The Ministry of Transport of Kazakhstan has already published a preliminary report on the investigation of J2-8243 flight from Baku to Grozny. Aviation operates under its own set of rules, particularly when it comes to delicate matters such as accident investigations. As insiders affirm, this method of inquiry is what allows aviation to maintain its status as the safest mode of transport—despite how incomprehensible it may seem to many that a multi-tonne metal structure can remain airborne with passengers aboard. Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Transport has disclosed preliminary findings of the aviation investigation. By definition, such an inquiry does not aim to identify or assign blame. Instead, it seeks answers to entirely different questions: What was the technical condition of the aircraft? How reliably and accurately did its systems function? How appropriately did the crew behave?

The results of the investigation were both expected and sensational. Experts confirmed that the aircraft was fully operational, and the crew was exceptionally well-prepared. The cause of the disaster was external interference. In other words, the Embraer was shot down. Who exactly fired the missile is now a matter for criminal investigation rather than aviation inquiry. However, even the information disclosed by Kazakhstan was enough to trigger a powerful political backlash.

First and foremost, as the preliminary report shows, no evidence was found to support the narratives actively propagated by Russian official bodies in the hours and days following the tragedy. Recall that Rosaviatsiya hastily claimed the plane had "collided with birds," Rostov Air Traffic Control mentioned something about a "gas cylinder explosion onboard," and the Interfax agency attempted to float information about "technical malfunctions." These versions, which the President of Azerbaijan described as absurd, were still being circulated by the Russian side even after it became clear they did not align with reality.

Photographs of the wreckage showing characteristic holes in the fuselage emerged within hours of the disaster, and even non-experts could see these were unlikely to have been caused by a bird strike. Moreover, they bore no resemblance to a "gas cylinder explosion" or "technical malfunctions." Such damage to the fuselage is typically caused only by anti-aircraft missiles. The theory of a collision with a Ukrainian drone has also been disproven, as such an incident would have left entirely different traces.

While no specific culprits are named in the report, the data presented speaks volumes.

Pure facts

Experts draw attention to the chronology of events. From the moment of departure from Baku until approaching Grozny, neither the aircraft nor the crew encountered any issues. However, at 04:55:54, the crew reported that both GPS navigators had been lost.

It is now known that as the Azerbaijani Embraer approached Grozny airport, there was an attempt to "repel an attack by Ukrainian drones." Later, however, no evidence of Ukrainian drones appearing in Chechen airspace simultaneously with the Azerbaijani aircraft was found. A false alarm. In principle, deploying electronic warfare systems and jamming GPS signals are standard elements of "anti-drone strategy." Drones also rely on GPS signals for navigation. But in such cases, air traffic controllers are required to close the airspace where the drone attack is being repelled and immediately inform all aircraft in the vicinity. Yet, no one warned the Azerbaijani crew about the GPS signal disruption or the jamming of communication and navigation systems! And there was simply no way for the pilots to learn about it themselves.

The tragedy deepened. Despite losing GPS signals, the pilots continued attempting to land in Grozny. They requested vectors for descent, and so on. Fog further complicated the situation, making landing impossible.

Then came the climax. Analysis and comparison of data from the black boxes of the downed aircraft revealed that the captain failed to land in Grozny and decided to return to Baku. Shortly after, at approximately 05:13, the cockpit voice recorder captured an "external sound," indicating an impact on the aircraft. Twenty-four seconds later, another followed. This is a standard operating pattern for anti-aircraft missiles. Typically, two missiles are launched at the aircraft, detonating not directly against the fuselage but about 10 meters away, enveloping the plane in a cloud of destructive fragments. According to the flight data recorder, after the first impact, the third hydraulic system of the aircraft failed, followed six seconds later by the first, and 21 seconds later by the second hydraulic system. Loss of hydraulics rendered the aircraft virtually uncontrollable. That the pilots managed to reach Aktau and save 29 lives in such circumstances is nothing short of a miracle. Unfortunately, they perished themselves. But they performed a miracle.

Only at 05:21 did a message arrive stating that the "Carpet" protocol had been activated! Twenty-five minutes had passed since GPS jamming began and the passenger aircraft was abandoned to its fate. Eight minutes elapsed after the launch of anti-aircraft missiles. Throughout this time, the pilots remained unaware of what was happening on the ground. No service bothered to inform them!

There is a common saying: every air defence system has its graveyard. Human error has not been eradicated, and as Cicero noted long ago, humans are prone to mistakes. But not all errors are equal. Shooting down a scheduled civilian aircraft attempting to land at a civilian airport is an exceedingly rare occurrence. The irreparable blunder of Russia's air defense can perhaps only be compared to the tragedy at Tehran airport, where Iranian defenders mistakenly shot down a Ukrainian passenger airliner shortly after take-off. What can result from criminal negligence and a lack of proper coordination among ground services?

"We'll see each other in court"

In the days following the disaster, President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev made a series of stern statements directed at Moscow. At the same time, Baku announced its demands: issue an apology, acknowledge responsibility, initiate—or at least begin—a transparent investigation, and provide compensation. More than a month and a half has passed since the catastrophe—no one is rushing to apologize, no one acknowledges responsibility, and no one intends to seek or punish those responsible.

Baku refuses to accept this. The closure of the "Russian House" in Azerbaijan and the cessation of Rossotrudnichestvo’s operations are formally unrelated to the Aktobe air disaster, but there is no doubt that the broader context influenced this decision, much of which is shaped by growing outrage over Russia’s behaviour. Both the insolent statements of Russian deputies, political analysts, and propagandists and the stubborn silence of official structures unwilling to admit responsibility for the downed aircraft and offer apologies are infuriating.

Baku refrained from issuing harsh political assessments. However, leaks appeared in the press: Azerbaijan is preparing to file a case with the international court. While the investigations by Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Transport and ICAO focused on aviation safety, the international court represents concrete accountability—both for individuals and the state.

Grounds for filing with the international court existed from the very beginning after the disaster. However, Azerbaijan initially refrained from escalating the situation into such a severe scenario, giving Moscow time to assess the situation and resolve it without significant losses. Experts believe that if Moscow had mustered the courage to acknowledge responsibility for its air deference’s error, apologize, and initiate a full investigation, the current political crisis between the countries could have been avoided. But apparently, apologizing to "some southern republic" was deemed beneath their dignity.

Baku waited in vain for several days before abandoning the investigation of the aviation disaster within the framework of the Interstate Aviation Committee. Trust in Russia has been severely undermined. Now the situation is even worse. Moscow had over 40 days to acknowledge responsibility, apologize, and begin an investigation. After all, it was clear that the Azerbaijani civilian aircraft was struck by a Russian anti-aircraft missile—Moscow undoubtedly learned this long before Baku, Astana, or Brazil. It had time to initiate a criminal investigation and determine which valiant air defence officer managed to mistake a passenger aircraft for a drone and fire anti-aircraft missiles at the liner. There was a chance to avoid global consequences, but with each passing day, it diminishes.

At an unofficial level in Baku, references are already being made to the massacre of the last Garabagh khan and his family, the resettlement of Armenians from Persia and the Ottoman Empire onto Azerbaijani lands, the gifting of Western Zangezur to Armenia, and Russian weapons supplied to Yerevan during the Garabagh war—including Iskander missile systems—and much more. Against this backdrop, preserving former allied relations will be extremely difficult. Relations are a two-way street.