Putin points out the “traitor under Aliyev’s nose” — Weekend

This week’s most significant global developments are covered in QALAMPIR.UZ’s Weekend program.

Did Putin reveal Aliyev’s “snake in the fold”?

During the past week, Azerbaijan’s domestic politics have witnessed a major upheaval. Ramiz Mehdiyev—once known as the “Boss” or the “Grey Cardinal,” a man often described as the “uncrowned king” and second only to the president—was placed under house arrest at nearly 90 years of age. Mehdiyev, who headed the Presidential Administration of Azerbaijan from 1995 to 2019 and served as President of the National Academy of Sciences from 2019 to 2022, now faces serious criminal charges. According to court rulings, the request to impose house arrest for four months was granted as he is suspected of committing particularly grave offenses.

When the news first broke, two main theories emerged. The first suggested that Mehdiyev played a key role in forming anti-Azerbaijani groups in Europe and provided them with financial support. This activity was allegedly aimed at promoting Russian interests and damaging relations between Azerbaijan and European countries.

In addition, Mehdiyev was reportedly detained for attempts to launder wealth acquired through illegal means. Soon after, media outlets reported that the “Grey Cardinal” was suspected of both crimes. He has been charged under Article 278.1 (attempting to seize state power), Article 274 (treason), and Article 193-1.3.2 (money laundering) of the Criminal Code.

What makes this case even more striking is that the arrest allegedly relates to his preparation for a coup d’état. Azerbaijani media has been abuzz with discussions for days. Even more surprising are reports claiming that the 87-year-old former official sought assistance from Russian President Vladimir Putin. According to various sources, Putin allegedly revealed Mehdiyev’s plans to Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev during their recent “reconciliation dinner” in Tajikistan. Russia reportedly warned Baku about Mehdiyev’s plans, and his arrest shortly after the meeting has been interpreted as confirmation of this information.

Reports claim that Mehdiyev, known as the “Grey Cardinal,” had spent the past year working on a plan to overthrow Aliyev’s government and had even proposed the plan to the Kremlin. The chain of events is said to have started after the downing of an AZAL aircraft, which triggered a Baku–Moscow crisis. Mehdiyev allegedly viewed this as an opportunity to further his goals and presented his coup plan to Russia, asking for support. Under the plan, he would establish a “State Council” under his leadership after seizing power, and details of its composition were reportedly shared with Russia. However, Moscow is said to have disclosed the plan to Azerbaijan, effectively exposing Mehdiyev.

Russia’s stance can be explained by the internal divisions within its own policy toward Azerbaijan—one faction favoring a hardline approach, and the other maintaining a softer, more cooperative stance. Ultimately, Putin made the final decision, informing Aliyev during the Dushanbe meeting and signaling his desire to improve bilateral relations. In essence, Russia used Mehdiyev’s failed coup plot for political leverage and sacrificed him in the process.

Throughout his career, Mehdiyev was known for his pro-Russian orientation. Even during the Soviet era, he was allegedly linked to Moscow’s intelligence networks. He used his influence over the years to promote Russian-aligned officials within the Azerbaijani government.

By the time of the Second Karabakh War, pro-Russian officials had largely been removed from power, including Mehdiyev himself. He was later elected President of the National Academy of Sciences (ANAS), where he continued political intrigues, turning the institution into a tool of influence. Eventually, nearly all institutes demanded his resignation. On February 14, 2022, citing age-related reasons, he stepped down. Now, he has reportedly been expelled from the ruling “New Azerbaijan” Party. Many members of parliament are calling for him to be held accountable before the Milli Majlis, while he has also been removed from the Republic’s Security Council.

At present, his family and close associates are banned from leaving the country. It is widely believed that Mehdiyev did not act alone, and that several officials who helped develop the coup plan and maintained secret communications with Russia are now under scrutiny.

Following these developments, attention has also turned to Mehdiyev’s immense wealth accumulated during both Heydar Aliyev’s and Ilham Aliyev’s presidencies. Open sources report that the Mehdiyev family owns extensive vineyards in the scenic Novkhani village, as well as 216 hectares of land across Baku, Absheron, and Goranboy districts. They also own a 50-hectare orchard in the village of Khinali, Goranboy District. In addition, a luxurious villa on Tbilisi Avenue in Baku, once listed for $8 million, is attributed to Mehdiyev. He reportedly owns multiple villas across Goychay, Shamakhi, Goygol, and other regions.

His wife, Galina Mehdiyeva, owns an 892-hundredth land plot in the Mashtaga township, while his daughter, Kamila Aliyeva, owns 240 hundredths. His daughter-in-law, Nigar Mehdiyeva, is said to be one of the founders of “Digital Media” LLC and a major shareholder in “Bank BTB” JSC.

Ukraine moves away from Tomahawk missiles

On October 17, U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met again at the White House—their third meeting this year and fifth overall. At the start of the meeting, Zelensky congratulated Trump for ending the Middle East conflict and expressed hope that, with his involvement, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine might also come to an end. Trump, as usual, began by complimenting Zelensky’s suit before discussions commenced between the two delegations seated across a long table.

During the talks, Trump revealed plans to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in Budapest, explaining that the meeting would take place in a bilateral format. He promised to maintain regular contact with Zelensky and said Hungary was chosen as the venue because it is a safe and neutral country whose leader, Viktor Orbán, is respected by both him and Putin.

“This is a leader we like. We like Viktor Orbán—he’s liked by both me and Putin. It’s a safe country. He’s doing a great job managing his nation. So yes, we’ll meet with him—he’ll be a good host,” Trump said.

At that point, Trump surprised Zelensky. Just days earlier, the U.S. president had sharply criticized Putin and even suggested supplying Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine to stop him. However, Trump changed his tone, saying Putin wanted peace and that there was no need to provide such missiles to Ukraine.

“It’s better to end this war without Tomahawks. I think we’re very close to that,” Trump remarked, leaving Zelensky stunned.

According to Trump, the conflict could end soon if both sides are willing to compromise. He again expressed confidence that negotiations could close the chapter on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Zelensky, who had pinned high hopes on U.S. weapons, was visibly disappointed. Before and during his visit, he repeatedly mentioned Tomahawk missiles, but Trump’s two-hour conversation with Putin reportedly ended those expectations.

Desperate to maintain momentum, Zelensky offered a counterproposal—thousands of Ukrainian-made drones in exchange for Tomahawks. The open portion of the meeting concluded after this, with the rest of the discussions taking place behind closed doors.

Although this visit was less dramatic than his earlier one in spring, it proved far more difficult for Ukraine. Major outlets like Axios and CNN reported that the meeting was tense and ended without positive results. After a two-and-a-half-hour discussion, Trump reportedly rejected Ukraine’s request for long-range missiles.

As a result, the nearly finalized deal on missile and drone exchanges reached during the UN session in September has now stalled. Zelensky also faced subtle pressure during the visit—for example, U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth attended the meeting wearing a tie in the colors of the Russian flag, which observers interpreted as a symbolic gesture.

Nevertheless, both leaders attempted to frame the outcome positively. Trump posted on his social media account that Russia and Ukraine “must stop at the current line” and reach an agreement, calling the meeting “very interesting and sincere.” Zelensky, in his briefing, partly agreed, downplaying the Tomahawk issue. He stated that he and Trump had agreed not to disclose details of the long-range weapons discussion in order to prevent escalation and maintain diplomatic stability.

Budapest: The second “round” between Trump and Putin

Budapest has been chosen as the latest possible venue for a meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. A few months ago, Putin had warmly invited Trump in Alaska, saying, “Next time, in Moscow.” However, a sitting U.S. president visiting the Kremlin is unlikely to happen anytime soon. Despite any public statements from both sides, normalizing relations between Moscow and Washington will still take considerable time. Therefore, as Trump himself has indicated, Budapest seems to be the most suitable option—especially since Viktor Orbán remains one of the few European Union leaders who has not openly opposed Putin and continues to purchase Russian gas.

However, holding the meeting in Hungary is not without complications. The main issue lies in enforcing the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrant—a process that many countries have already stopped taking seriously. As is widely known, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán was among the first leaders to defy the ICC’s procedures. Back in 2023, his government declared that it would not arrest Putin if he visited Hungary. In 2024, when an arrest warrant was issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Hungary again announced that it would not hand him over to the ICC. This time, Budapest has also guaranteed that it will not comply with the court’s demands and that Putin will not be detained. Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó officially confirmed this assurance in an interview with Russia’s TASS news agency.

According to Szijjártó, the Hungarian government will provide all necessary conditions for the U.S. and Russian presidents to hold talks in a safe and peaceful environment. He also emphasized that Budapest does not plan to consult with or seek permission from allied countries regarding the summit. It is worth noting that Hungary signed the Rome Statute in 1999 and ratified it in 2001. Over the years, repeated incidents like these have pushed Hungary to begin the process of withdrawing from the ICC—though that process has yet to be completed.

Returning to the planned Trump-Putin meeting, many Western leaders have voiced opposition to the talks being held exclusively between the two. European leaders insist that a representative from the EU should also participate in the Budapest negotiations. According to Bloomberg, the goal is to prevent Putin from swaying Trump in Russia’s favor and to ensure the meeting does not result in outcomes beneficial only to Moscow. Interestingly, the candidate proposed to represent the EU is Finnish President Alexander Stubb, who is expected to visit Tashkent soon and is therefore not entirely unfamiliar to Uzbekistan.

If this information is true, it is natural to wonder why Finland’s president was chosen. After all, the EU has many prominent leaders, including Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer, Giorgia Meloni, Friedrich Merz, or even European Council President António Costa and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. However, the key factor here appears to be whether the representative appeals to Trump personally. The former U.S. president has never hidden his dislike for certain leaders and even joked about it during the recent Gaza Peace Summit in Egypt. His relationship with Macron remains tense, and he is not close with Starmer or Meloni—though the latter’s right-wing stance also makes her a risky choice for the EU. She is more likely to defend narrow national interests at the table rather than a united European position.

Under these circumstances, Alexander Stubb seems to be the most reasonable choice. In addition, he has recently become more active on the international stage. When Trump gathered European leaders at the White House to discuss Ukraine and Russia, Stubb was also present. At that meeting, Trump spoke warmly of him, describing Stubb as a “strong and capable leader.”

“Yesterday a terrorist, today Mr. President”

On October 15 this year, Syria’s interim president, Ahmad al-Shara, made his first official visit to the Kremlin. Since coming to power, al-Shara has proven himself a skillful diplomat and successfully shed the “terrorist” label once associated with his name. Ironically, his visit to Moscow marked a meeting with those who had once called him an extremist and even fought against him on Bashar al-Assad’s side. Putin received him as the legitimate president of Syria. During this inaugural visit, al-Shara and Putin discussed the future of bilateral relations and several pressing issues. The high-level meeting began with public remarks, where Putin once again emphasized the “special relationship” between Moscow and Damascus. He also praised the parliamentary elections held under al-Shara’s leadership on October 5.

Putin addressed his former long-time adversary as “Mr. President,” showing him full respect. In fact, the Russian leader had already accepted the new political reality in December 2024 when al-Shara’s faction took control of the government. During his annual televised Q&A session “Direct Line” that same month, Putin stated, “Syria has not been taken over by terrorists,” signaling his readiness to recognize al-Shara’s administration. Less than a year later, he has now hosted his former enemy in the Kremlin—an undeniable example of how swiftly political fortunes can change.

What exactly was discussed between the two leaders remains a matter of speculation. Many observers predicted that while Putin and al-Shara could find common ground on most issues of cooperation, they would face major obstacles regarding the extradition of Bashar al-Assad. From the moment the visit was announced, analysts suggested that two key topics would dominate the talks: the fate of the Tartus and Khmeimim facilities, and the question of Assad’s extradition. Other areas of cooperation were also expected to be discussed—and they were. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak told journalists that Moscow is ready to participate in energy and transport projects and assist in Syria’s reconstruction. In return, Russia secured an agreement to utilize Syria’s oil fields. Novak added that Damascus is interested in importing wheat, food, and pharmaceuticals from Russia. Al-Shara, in turn, affirmed that Syria would honor all previously signed agreements and continue adhering to them, which effectively guarantees the inviolability of Russia’s military bases in Syrian territory.

Some also speculated that Syria might formally request Assad’s extradition to Damascus, as criminal proceedings had already been initiated against him. However, this topic was not mentioned publicly. Prior to the meeting, Reuters reported, citing Syrian officials, that such a request was likely to be made. Currently residing in Moscow, Bashar al-Assad occasionally appears in the news, with some reports suggesting that he has recently become deeply absorbed in video games. Still, the main question remains unanswered: will Moscow ever hand over the exiled Assad to Syria?

Historically, that seems highly unlikely. Russia rarely extradites those under its protection—Viktor Yanukovych of Ukraine and Assad himself are clear examples. Moscow, known for installing loyal “puppet” leaders in other nations, would risk undermining this entire strategy if it decided to surrender Assad. Such a move could damage the Kremlin’s credibility among its allies and erode trust within its network of client states.

On the other hand, the Kremlin often claims to be more loyal to its partners than the White House. At first glance, this argument suggests that Moscow may refuse to hand Assad over to al-Shara. Yet, looking back, it is hard to identify a single ally whose life Russia has truly protected or saved. Even during Putin’s time in power, some of Moscow’s closest partners—such as Saddam Hussein in the Middle East and Muammar Gaddafi in North Africa—met tragic ends. In both cases, the Kremlin offered no tangible assistance.