Israeli Experts and Azerbaijani Jewish Leaders Criticize Israel's Recognition of Armenian Genocide
Following Israel's government decision to officially recognize the Armenian genocide, criticism has emerged from within the Jewish community in Azerbaijan and among Israeli foreign policy and security experts. Professor Ephraim Inbar, president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security and an expert on Israel-Turkey relations, described the move as a "childish and petty mistake" that could exact a diplomatic price from Israel. He argued that the decision appears to be an attempt to "strike at the Turks," but in reality, it risks harming Azerbaijan, which he called a "strategic asset" and a country with a deep alliance with Israel.
Inbar emphasized that foreign policy should be based on current interests rather than historical grievances, advising Israel to engage with Turkey "quietly and wisely" rather than through declarative actions that might alienate moderate actors and damage strategic friendships. Concurrently, leaders of the three Jewish communities in Azerbaijan, Milikh Yevdayev (Mountain Jews), Alexander Shrovski (Ashkenazi Jews), and Rabbi Zamir Isayev (Sephardic Jews), appealed to Israeli Knesset members not to support initiatives recognizing the Armenian genocide. They argued that complex historical issues should be examined by scholars and historians, not resolved through political decisions, warning that such moves could undermine trust between Jerusalem and Baku during sensitive peace efforts between Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Rabbi Zamir Isayev reiterated in an interview with JNews that historical disputes should remain in the realm of academic research and historical debate rather than political tools. This criticism aligns with the official condemnation from Baku, which stated that Israel's decision harms bilateral relations and urged Jerusalem to reconsider. Additionally, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan refrained from welcoming Israel's recognition, expressing opposition to politicizing the Armenian genocide issue.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.