Fiery protests in US and Iran-Israel clinch Caliber.Az weekly review

The editorial team of Caliber.Az presents a new episode of the program "Sobitiya" (Events) with Murad Abiyev, featuring the main news of the week related to Azerbaijan and beyond.

The Middle East

Circumstances compel us, contrary to tradition, to begin not with regional but with global news. A new war has broken out in the Middle East. In the early hours of Friday, Israel launched a large-scale operation targeting Iran's nuclear and military infrastructure. As a result of the operation, several members of Iran’s top military leadership and nuclear scientists were also killed. Iran responded several hours later with missile strikes on Israel.

However, you are likely already aware of all this and continue to follow the updates in the news. What interests us more is the international context of these events — and it is no less striking. Statements from the U.S. leadership indicate that the operation was not only coordinated but jointly planned by Tel Aviv and Washington. Trump did not miss the opportunity to remind the public that exactly two months ago he gave Iran a 60-day ultimatum to reconsider and agree to a deal on its nuclear program. Those 60 days expired just before Israel’s operation. Even earlier, Iranian officials had proudly declared that they would not back down from their nuclear ambitions.

For Washington, this was also a way to demonstrate that it does not make empty threats — that Whitcoff’s soft approach during negotiations was merely situational, and that his naive smile was nothing more than a mask of politeness, concealing not just a set of teeth, but the entire arsenal of military power held by the United States and its allies.

In this context, let’s recall another smile — that of Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi after yet another round of talks with the U.S. Apparently, at the time, the Iranians believed they were outsmarting the Americans. Yesterday morning turned out to be a brutal reckoning for that overconfidence.

Does this mean that the much-publicized quarrel between Trump and Netanyahu was also staged as part of a disinformation campaign against Tehran? Most likely, yes. After all, operations like the strikes launched — and still ongoing — against Iran are not prepared over the course of a few days or even weeks.

It turns out that while Trump was supposedly displeased with Netanyahu over the latter’s hardline stance on Iran, he was quietly turning a blind eye — or, more likely, actively assisting the Israelis in preparing the operation.

Could the current attack on Iran ultimately lead to a change of power in the country? Unlikely — though no scenario can be ruled out. First, an external threat typically rallies both the people and the ruling regime. Second — and paradoxically — it may actually benefit both the U.S. and Israel to keep the theocratic regime in place, as long as it is stripped of its main source of pride: the nuclear program. Even in this weakened state, provided its army isn’t crushed, Iran would still serve as a kind of bogeyman for the monarchies of the Persian Gulf.

It’s also paradoxical that a war with Israel and the U.S. now allows Iran’s current leadership to save face while winding down the nuclear program — which, in truth, had long become an unjustified burden for them. Now they can declare that the odds were overwhelming, but “we will never abandon our goals” — and from there, it all plays out like the old Eastern proverb about the shah and the donkey.

Isn’t that perhaps why Araghchi was smiling so slyly?

The United States

Protests are taking place across the United States, particularly in California, against immigration raids aimed at identifying and deporting undocumented migrants. Demonstrations include not only immigrants themselves, but also thousands of sympathisers. The situation escalated to the point that President Trump deployed National Guard units to Los Angeles.

What sparked this unrest? For years, there has been a broad consensus in American society regarding a specific group of undocumented immigrants — primarily from neighbouring Mexico — who have no ties to criminal activity. Traditionally, federal authorities turned a blind eye to their presence, often citing economic reasons.

Trump has chosen to break with this tradition. Driven by the promises he made both during his election campaign and after taking office, he declared the mass deportation of one million migrants within his first year as a top priority — a goal that now forces him to adopt drastic measures.

The first and most intense flare-up occurred in Los Angeles, which is symbolic in many ways. California — and its largest city, Los Angeles — has long been not only a hub for immigrants but also a stronghold of liberal sentiment. The state has consistently voted for the Democratic Party.

This gives the entire conflict a significant political dimension. California Governor Gavin Newsom, once considered one of the frontrunners of the Democratic Party, is now rapidly regaining lost political ground. At the centre of the legal-political dispute — which is only beginning — lies the use of the National Guard, which Newsom and many other Democrats consider unconstitutional, arguing that it violates states’ rights.

The immigration issue is poised to become one of the central themes of the upcoming electoral campaigns, starting with the midterm congressional elections.

Azerbaijan – Armenia

And finally, to regional developments. In Baku, the trial continues of Armenian nationals accused of crimes against peace and humanity, as well as war crimes. The testimony of the defendant Levon Mnatsakanyan has provided further evidence of Armenia’s — including Prime Minister Pashinyan’s government’s — involvement in the occupation of Azerbaijani territories. Specifically, Mnatsakanyan stated that he was relieved of his so-called position in the separatist entity by the President of Armenia, with the participation of the Prime Minister. He added that at the time, Nikol Pashinyan was the Prime Minister of Armenia and Armen Sarkissian was President.

This is significant. These statements undermine any attempt by Pashinyan and his team to distance themselves from the occupation by claiming the separatist entity operated autonomously.

Meanwhile, Pashinyan also attended the GLOBSEC 2025 international security forum in Prague this past week. There, he stated that Yerevan has no intention of limiting the presence of Russian troops on Armenian territory, insisting that Armenia's foreign policy is balanced. He pointed out that alongside Russian troops, an EU mission is also operating in Armenia. In doing so, Pashinyan openly acknowledged that the EU mission possesses broader powers and capabilities than mere monitoring — since he equated it with the Russian military base.

This raises an important question: how will Pashinyan justify the need to withdraw the EU mission once a peace agreement with Azerbaijan is signed? After all, the draft treaty stipulates that both sides must guarantee the absence of third-party armed forces along the border.