In early November, Baku will host the General Assembly of the Conference of European Rabbis. The event will focus on the Abraham Accords, religious freedom, and the fight against antisemitism in Europe — topics that align well with Azerbaijan’s effort to present itself as a model of peaceful coexistence among different ethnic and religious groups. Unsurprisingly, Tehran could not let such symbolism go unchallenged. Recently, Iran’s leading media outlets have launched a wave of biased and provocative coverage against Azerbaijan, blending genuine geopolitical concerns with outright antisemitism. 

The most significant statement regarding the rabbis’ conference came from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s top advisor, the seasoned diplomat, Ali Akbar Velayati. He dubbed the gathering “surprising and regrettable” and accused Azerbaijan of “crossing religious boundaries” and “encroaching on the dignity of Shiism.” Velayati further linked the event to what he characterized as Azerbaijan’s broader alignment with the Abraham Accords and the pro-normalization trend among some Muslim-majority states in Central Asia. He characterized the initiative as a “senseless, anti-Islamic, and anti-humanitarian” step that, he warned, would ultimately backfire against Baku.

The IRGC-affiliated Tasnim News Agency headlined the conference “Another betrayal of Islam by Aliyev in favor of the Zionists,” in a report on the same day as Velayati’s statement. Tasnim highlighted that the conference would be the first of its kind to be held in a Muslim-majority country, framing it as an effort to promote “Zionist Judaism.” The outlet predicted that the event would trigger a backlash from “supporters of Palestine, the oppressed, and Muslims,” casting the gathering as a provocation against broader regional and religious sensitivities.

Fars News, also affiliated with the IRGC, condemned President Ilham Aliyev’s decision to host the Conference of European Rabbis on its 70th anniversary — with Israeli representatives attending — as “not only a stain on his political career, but also a clear betrayal of Muslim peoples and the ideals of liberating Quds (Jerusalem).” The news outlet warned that “the history and public opinion of the Islamic world will not forget this disgrace.” Fars also highlighted the symbolic importance of the gathering, noting that it is the first time such a conference would be held outside the West and in a Muslim-majority country, arguing, like Tasnim, that it would serve as “a platform for the promotion of Zionist Judaism.”

Mehr News Agency, affiliated with Iran’s Supreme Leader, stated that Israel is pursuing multiple objectives by organizing the Conference of European Rabbis in Azerbaijan: expanding the Abraham Accords, increasing cultural and religious soft power influence, exploiting Azerbaijan’s geopolitical position, gaining international legitimacy, and sending a message to Central Asia.

President Aliyev is expected to address the three-day gathering. The hardline Iranian newspaper Farhikhtegan depicts the event as part of a broader Israeli strategy, alleging that “one of Tel Aviv’s central objectives in Azerbaijan is the cultivation of a Jewish lobby. Such structures, the paper contends, “not only organize the country’s Jewish community but also extend Israel’s political, cultural, and economic influence throughout Azerbaijan and the wider South Caucasus.” Beyond official ties, Farhikhtegan attributes hidden aims to these networks, including eroding Shiite identity in favor of an ethno-national one, grooming Turkic-Jewish elites for leadership roles, and promoting joint cultural and scientific initiatives designed to facilitate Israel’s “soft” penetration of the region. The paper argues that growing military and economic cooperation between Baku and Tel Aviv has created fertile ground for these efforts, with Israel seeking to deepen its influence through cultural events, academic institutions, and international conferences. Ultimately, Farhikhtegan situates the “Jewish lobby” in Azerbaijan within Israel’s broader regional strategy, which it describes as an attempt “to contain Muslims in the Caucasus and strengthen the position of the Zionist regime on Iran’s borders.”

Ali Akbar Bagheri Bonabi, imam of the central mosque in Parsabad—a city in Iran’s Ardabil Province with a mostly Azerbaijani population—linked the Baku conference directly to the ongoing war in Gaza. “Today, as Gaza suffers from heavy bombardments and attacks by the malicious Zionist regime, a country that claims to be Muslim is set to host a conference of Zionist rabbis in Baku,” he declared. The imam framed Azerbaijan’s actions as part of a broader pattern of aligning with Israel, accusing Baku of suppressing pro-Gaza protests and restricting Shiite mourning rituals during Muharram—the first month of the Islamic calendar. Bonabi argued that such moves demonstrate that Azerbaijani authorities “serve the Zionist regime, both in energy policy and in politics.” He concluded with an appeal for Azerbaijan to “reconsider its course.”

In Khuzestan Province, the Basij organization of Shahid Chamran University in Ahvaz condemned the planned Baku conference in strong terms. “The news of the ‘Zionist Rabbis’ conference in a neighboring Muslim and Shiite country is not only surprising but also shocking,” the group’s statement read. Citing the Supreme Leader’s repeated calls to sever “the economic arteries of the Zionist regime,” the group accused Azerbaijan of complicity in Israel’s actions by “supplying fuel and providing assistance to this regime.”

The statement shows how Basij networks at Iranian universities — volunteer groups working under the IRGC)—spread the ideology of the Islamic Revolution. Their involvement highlights how Tehran’s opposition to Azerbaijan hosting the event is reflected not only in state media and among clerics but also within the regime’s paramilitary and ideological groups on university campuses.

On September 13, Mehr warned that holding the European Rabbis’ Conference in Baku without strong pushback from the Islamic world would mark a “dangerous turning point” in the normalization of Israel’s presence in Muslim-majority countries. The news agency argued that Israel’s strategic goal is to establish a foothold in the South Caucasus while embedding itself “culturally and religiously within the Islamic geography.”

“Azerbaijan’s leaders are not simply hosting a religious conference but facilitating what they describe as ‘an anti-Islamic project’ designed to erode support for Palestine and weaken the identity of the Islamic ummah,” it stated.

The Iranian think tank Iran Diplomacy argued that Baku’s hosting of European rabbis and Israeli officials, along with its trilateral agreements with the United States and Armenia, reflect a significant shift in Azerbaijan’s geopolitical direction— and noted that this was taking place despite its leading to increased tensions with Iran.

Tasnim went even further, asserting that the Azerbaijani government under President Aliyev has increasingly pursued policies “aligned with Israel’s strategic interests and directed against the Islamic world.” The report emphasized that Baku has strengthened its diplomatic and security ties with Tel Aviv, hosting prominent events such as the 70th anniversary of the Conference of European Rabbis and opening an embassy in Israel.

The news agency added that these developments have been accompanied by extensive military cooperation, including the use of Azerbaijani airspace and airports for Israeli flights. It cited reports suggesting the presence of Israeli surveillance and radar facilities on Azerbaijani territory, framing these developments as part of a broader strategy to strengthen Israel’s foothold in the region.

These examples of Iranian propaganda help us understand some rules of Iranian foreign policy, as the regime’s propaganda follows consistent patterns and pursues specific goals. No “peaceful” statements by Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, or other Iranian “moderates” should be allowed to obscure the Iranian regime’s entrenched and extreme antisemitism.

Antisemitism and glorification of terrorism

In the final communique of the emergency Arab-Islamic summit in Doha on September 15, Iran rejected any reference to the two-state solution. Reaffirming what it called Iran’s “unwavering support” for the Palestinian cause, Iran’s foreign ministry stated that the only “real and lasting” solution is a single democratic state encompassing all historic Palestine, “through a referendum with the participation of all Palestinians both inside the occupied territories.”

The statement officially dissociated Iran from the communique’s references to East Jerusalem, the 1967 borders, or any implied recognition of Israel. This wording reiterates Khamenei’s “solution”—namely that Israel has no right to exist.

On the same day, Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi, who attended the summit, ﷟said in an interview with Iranian state TV that “the Zionist regime remains the top threat to regional security, and what the Islamic Republic had warned of for years regarding Israel in an interview with the state TV channel that “the Zionist regime remains the top threat to regional security, and what the Islamic Republic had warned of about Israel for years is now the shared view of all Islamic countries.” is now the shared view of all Islamic countries.”

Just days earlier, on September 9, Iranian hardline and IRGC-affiliated media praised the terrorist attack in Jerusalem that killed six Israeli civilians.

Following is a selection of statements from Iranian officials glorifying the cold-blooded murder of six Israelis, solely because the victims were Jews: 

• Keyhan  called the attack “a black day for Zionists in Quds [Jerusalem] and Gaza,” stating that “22 Zionists were killed or wounded” in operations across both locations. Iran uses the Arabic word Quds for Jerusalem. The paper’s commentary described the shooting “a small attempt to compensate for the major crimes committed by the Zionist regime in Gaza, bringing some happiness to the residents of Gaza.” Keyhan also highlighted the “successful operation” in Jerusalem, describing how the attackers disguised themselves as local police, stormed an Israeli bus, and “sent many Zionists to hell.”
  
  

• Hamshahri ran the headline “A Tough Day for Zionists.” The paper focused on “coordinated resistance blows from Palestinians and Yemenis, describing how drones from Yemen, the shooting in Jerusalem, and security incidents in Gaza had created “synchronized pressure.” Hamashahri stated that the Jerusalem operation “delivered a fresh shock at a highly sensitive moment” and “proved that the security grip in the West Bank cannot prevent attacks.” 
  
  

• Javan went with the headline, “Zionists’ Black Day’ in Jerusalem and Gaza,” describing “new waves of anger and resistance among Palestinian youth. The website said that the attack was “a painful response to the regime’s genocide policies,” and that “increasingly aggressive Israeli policy only incubates further instability.” 
  
  

• Vatan-e Emrouz: The newspaper’s headline read “Quds’s revenge” with the underline stating “Seven settlers killed and at least fifteen injured in a heroic operation.” “No matter how much Israel bombs Gaza, it cannot suppress resistance in Jerusalem and the West Bank,” the paper’s report stated, with its editorial focused on the “failure of Israeli deterrence” and the “shattering of Tel Aviv’s secure image.”
  
  
• Iran State TV praised the Jerusalem attack, echoing the line that such “operations prove the vulnerability of the regime and encourage the morale of the resistance.”

Iran’s messaging incongruency

This aggressive, antisemitic rhetoric is concentrated in hardline and IRGC-affiliated media and is not repeated in reputable economic publications such as Dunya-e Eghtesad or other similarly less ideology-motivated journals. The contrast highlights the fact that IRGC-media are a propaganda machine. If Tehran limited its rhetoric to “moderates” like former foreign minister Mohammad-Javad Zarif—who last year offered Hanukkah greetings to Jews—it would be harder to expose its extremism. Instead, the radical line of the IRGC press reveals the regime’s true face.

Target audiences

The regime channels anti-Azerbaijan propaganda to specific audiences:

• Ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran: While many sympathize with the Republic of Azerbaijan, they are Iranians, both politically and culturally. Islam is crucial for Azerbaijanis in Iran, not because they are more devout than other Iranian groups, but because Shi’ite Islam forms the foundation of their Iranian identity. Non-Persian ethnic groups accept Iranian identity mainly because Iran is a diverse country united by a shared Iranian Muslim culture. By portraying Baku as undermining Muslim unity and harming Islam, the regime seeks to erode the sympathy of ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran for the Republic of Azerbaijan. 
  
  
• Grass-roots regime supporters:. Basij networks in Khuzestan spreads anti-Azerbaijan propaganda: this paramilitary organization is based on mobilizing rank-and-file regime supporters. Most of the Khuzestan population is also ethnic Arabs-the regime hopes to sow discord between Iran’s various ethnic groups, pitching them one against the other.

Azerbaijan’s alliance with the Abraham Accords is a threat to Iran

The peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia, under the auspices of the Trump administration, paves the way for resolving the Zangezour issue and Azerbaijan’s support for the Abraham Accords. If the Abraham Accords expand, it would deal a strategic blow to Tehran’s strategy, which aims to disrupt the Accords and prevent their expansion. However, if the failure of this strategy is mainly ideological, the Zangezour issue is a genuine geopolitical loss for Iran. 

If Armenia regulates its relations with Azerbaijan, it will earn royalties from transit through the Zangezour Corridor, while Baku will gain direct access to the Nakhichevan, a landlocked enclave. American security companies are expected to guarantee the safety of transit through Armenian territory in order to access Nakhichevan. As a result, Iran is likely to lose access to that strategic region. This development will eliminate the need for Azerbaijani transit through Iran to access Nakhichevan. Additionally, a gas pipeline being built from Nakhichevan to Turkey will eliminate the need to transport gas via Iran.. 

This is why Iran is making intense efforts to prevent the peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia from going ahead. However, for now, Iran’s “toolkit” for doing that has been significantly weakened. As a result, Tehran uses all possible means, including antisemitic slander to pursue its geopolitical goals. 

---

JISS Policy Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family.

---