.jpg)
Tatyana Felgengauer: Hello everyone! Welcome to our special year-end edition of Key Events. I am Tatyana Felgengauer. The Breakfast Show channel recently crossed 750,000 subscribers—thank you all, and please keep subscribing. Marat Guelman is making his debut on Key Events today. Welcome, Marat!
Marat Guelman: 750,000? I watched the counter. I said: "Once it hits 750k, I can appear." That’s a worthy audience for my participation!
Felgengauer: And Maxim Kurnikov is here—the man thanks to whom we have our studio in Berlin. By the way, I dropped a link in the chat to support Echo, which helps keep this studio running. Hi, Maxim!
Maxim Kurnikov: It's thanks to Echo and our supporters! This is our year-end Echo summary. We will examine the primary events of the past week, particularly the tragedy involving the downed Azerbaijani aircraft. Exploring how that situation unfolds and analyzing potential scenarios for Russia-Azerbaijan relations serves as a defining entry point for our year-end review. Marat, how closely did you follow that incident? It mirrors 2014 and MH17 in many ways.
Guelman: I couldn't focus on anything else all day because it is a horrific situation. First, the core contradiction: Putin attempts to maintain a domestic illusion that Russia is not at war, so civilian flights continue operating over a combat zone. Civilian air traffic operating inside an actively warring state is inherently absurd, driven by the regime's refusal to formally declare martial law or admit the scope of the war.
Second, it highlights absolute operational incompetence. Unprofessional personnel in Grozny were handed sophisticated, highly dangerous weaponry. It echoes the Buk missile crew in 2014—pressing buttons without understanding the consequences.
Third, the handling of the damaged aircraft afterward was appalling. The controllers routed it across the sea and jammed radio communications—leaving it without navigation coordinates and drastically reducing any chance of reaching land. It appeared they hoped everyone on board would perish so the truth would remain submerged.
It was a devastating year, and this event serves as a tragic exclamation point as it draws to a close.
Felgengauer: Maxim, how do you evaluate the diplomatic reaction? Azerbaijan appears unwilling to let Moscow sweep this under the rug. President Aliyev was flying to an informal CIS summit in Russia, received real-time intelligence regarding what happened to the Azerbaijani plane, turned his aircraft around, and returned directly to Baku. Official leaks and statements from Azerbaijani MPs demanding formal apologies followed quickly.
Kurnikov: Regarding international reactions, several nations hold key leverage here. First, Azerbaijan—it was their commercial airliner, their citizens, and their national carrier. Second, Kazakhstan, as several Kazakh citizens were on board and the flight originated near Akteau. Third, Brazil—as the manufacturer of the Embraer aircraft, their aviation safety authorities are legally mandated to participate in the investigation.
Given how many international actors are involved, attempting to deny responsibility so blatantly is extraordinary. We ought to be accustomed to official state lying by now, yet it remains shocking. Perhaps our ability to still be shocked shows we have retained some baseline sanity.
What type of political action are we observing when state authorities issue statements like "let's not jump to conclusions," while state media outlets simultaneously circulate stories about a "bird strike"? We see a similar dynamic along the Black Sea coast with recent oil spills—blackened shorelines, dead marine life, citizens weeping as they rescue oil-soaked birds, while official channels dismiss public concern. Simultaneously, the state throttles YouTube access and escalates criminal prosecutions against "foreign agents." Marat, how do you categorize this performance?
Guelman: It belongs not to art, but to clinical psychology. It stems from an executive structure that views itself as untouchable and regards the public as gullible. When Foreign Minister Lavrov claims "we haven't attacked anyone" or asserts that Russian forces strike strictly military targets—at the exact moment it is established that Russian air defenses struck a civilian airliner—he actively participates in this dynamic.
This relies on an entrenched state of doublethink:
Kurnikov: Regarding Aliyev, he demonstrated that he wasn't going to be pushed around. At that same summit, we observed classic sycophancy from Alexander Lukashenko, who criticized Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan for skipping meetings. Pashinyan pushed back, refusing to attend in person and participating only via video link. These exchanges demonstrate how fragile Moscow's regional alliances have become.
Guelman: Aliyev will leverage the situation pragmatically. Turning his plane around signaled to Putin that the situation could not be handled as business-as-usual. Moscow's strategy is clear: acknowledge an "incident" occurred without explicitly admitting missile fire, while keeping details vague. Aliyev will extract concessions from Putin in exchange for managing the public fallout.
What is most disturbing is the handling of the damaged aircraft. The head of Rosaviatsiya eventually acknowledged that a Russian missile struck the plane due to "a complex operational environment around Grozny airport during a drone attack."
Accidental strikes can occur in combat zones, but steering a damaged civilian aircraft out over water without navigation support—effectively pushing 70 passengers toward near-certain death to conceal an operational mistake—crosses an ethical line. Sitting in a control room making a calculated decision to let civilian passengers drown to cover up a command error is chilling.
Felgengauer: The cynicism is pervasive. On Friday, December 27, state media aired a holiday promo showing Santa Claus flying over Moscow being shot down by an air defense missile, followed by Ded Moroz celebrating that "no foreign entities belong in our skies." They broadcast that clip immediately after a foreign civilian airliner was struck by an air defense missile. No one bothered to pull it from the broadcast grid. Dozens of people—writers, actors, editors, and producers—produced and approved that content without hesitation. It highlights a complete moral collapse across the state media apparatus.
.jpg)
Felgengauer: Marat, if we look beyond this recent tragedy, what key events defined 2024 for you? Was it the murder of Alexey Navalny, or were there other turning points that challenged public indifference?
Guelman: First, a baseline observation: Russia is a nation at war, and flying through its airspace is inherently hazardous. Ukraine's airspace was closed because of war; Russia's airspace carries the same structural risks. Once international carriers acknowledge this reality, ordinary citizens will feel the isolation directly—not through moral epiphanies, but because commercial flight routes vanish.
Regarding my review of 2024, I categorize key developments across three levels:
Guelman: The rapid deployment of AI is reshaping human activity. Historically, since the Renaissance, we categorized individuals early in life as either technical ("physicists") or creative ("humanists"). AI is erasing that divide. Computer programmers today operate essentially as linguists, while AI outputs generate complex humanities knowledge.
Additionally, AI is transforming traditional professions:
Kurnikov: Examining the broader connections of 2024, events that appear isolated are deeply linked. Take the environmental disaster in Anapa, where an aging oil tanker split open, spilling tons of oil across the coastline.
Where does that story begin? It traces back to the expropriation of Yukos assets from Mikhail Khodorkovsky. River-going tankers were repurposed for open-sea oil transport through corrupt workarounds.
What did Alexey Navalny spend his life fighting? Institutional corruption, warning that it would cause physical damage to national infrastructure. A cafe owner in Anapa might have assumed high-level political trials had zero bearing on their business, only to wake up years later to a ruined coastline caused by those exact systemic workarounds.
Or consider the exposure of the prolific serial informant "Anna Korobkova." An investigation by anthropologist Alexandra Arkhipova alongside BBC journalists revealed that "Korobkova"—who filed thousands of denunciations against citizens, academics, and journalists—was actually a single isolated individual from Yekaterinburg named Ivan Abaturov.
A single individual filed thousands of denunciations from a single email account, and an entire bureaucratic apparatus—investigators, prosecutors, and Ministry of Justice officials—processed those complaints to target citizens. The informant hid behind a pseudonym, yet state investigators attached their real names to enforce those denunciations.
Guelman: Putin’s internal framework is built on a neo-estate society. He is attempting to construct a privileged military estate equivalent to historic nobility. Enrolling in the military grants your children priority university admission, tax exemptions, and legal leniency.
However, maintaining a rigid estate-based society in an information-driven century is a structural impossibility. You cannot operate a modern state as a giant military clan without destroying basic administrative function.
.jpg)
Felgengauer: Returning to Alexey Navalny's murder—how do you evaluate his historical and political legacy looking back over 2024?
Guelman: I categorized Navalny's death under "Personal" because we knew each other, but its significance is universal. His story echoes a classic narrative: a leader who voluntarily returned knowing what awaited him, whose courtroom speeches served as open sermons, and who faced his fate publicly.
His execution by the state demonstrated the regime's absolute moral bankruptcy. You can debate political models, but his murder stripped away academic euphemisms. As Ekaterina Schulmann noted, the regime's character was laid bare: they are murderers. Navalny’s sacrifice attached that permanent label to the regime. Any international actor seeking to negotiate with Putin must remember they are dealing with a regime that executes its primary political opponent in a remote penal colony.
Kurnikov: Navalny's death sent shockwaves through international politics. What he accomplished throughout his life, what he wrote in prison, and his moral stance remain vital.
Navalny underwent an intellectual evolution that outpaced much of the traditional political opposition. He emphasized individual action over reliance on a single leader: "Why do you need me? Each of you can resist, organize, and act independently."
While the formal political infrastructure was crushed internally, moral choices remain individual. Navalny's legacy operates as a permanent mirror for individual conscience—a standard for personal integrity and courage.
Felgengauer: The year 2024 also brought major internal tragedies, such as the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack—the deadliest attack inside Russia in two decades. Yet official narratives attempted to pivot responsibility toward Ukraine or the West rather than addressing internal security failures.
Guelman: When a state unleashes war, it opens a Pandora's box of violence that saturates society. The Crocus City Hall attack became absorbed into a broader environment of background violence.
The regime attempts to frame every internal crisis as an external Western plot, ignoring genuine internal security threats like radical extremist networks. By directing all state security resources toward crushing domestic dissent and waging external war, the state leaves its citizens vulnerable to real security threats.
Felgengauer: As we conclude our review of 2024, the geopolitical landscape shifts toward the upcoming US presidential inauguration in January 2025. Donald Trump's return to the White House will reframe international discussions regarding the war in Ukraine, NATO spending targets, and global security arrangements.
Guelman: The US election highlighted a broader global trend: a confrontation between established political institutions and populist disruptors. How these international shifts interact with the war in Ukraine will define 2025.
Kurnikov: While 2024 brought deep losses, independent thought and democratic principles persist across civil society in exile and within Russia. Rebuilding political consensus around those core principles remains our long-term task.
Felgengauer: Thank you, Marat Guelman and Maxim Kurnikov. Thank you to our 750,000 subscribers on Breakfast Show and the supporters of Echo. We will see you in 2025!
