Russia watches on as ally Iran is pummeled — and it's unlikely to go to Tehran's rescue

Russia's response to Iran's call for help is being closely watched on Monday after the U.S. bombed Tehran's nuclear facilities over the weekend — but Moscow might not be quick to offer its ally a hand.
The attacks on Iranian nuclear sites, which President Donald Trump described as an "obliteration," has left the Islamic Republic scrambling for support from the few friends it has on the global stage. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi headed to Moscow on Monday for "serious consultations" with Russian President Vladimir Putin over how to answer the assaults.
Iran has helped Russia with military drones throughout the war in Ukraine, but analysts now say there might be very little Moscow can or will to do to reciprocate.
"Iran has massively supported Putin's war against Ukraine with weapons and technology. On his trip to Moscow, Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi may now ask Moscow to return the favour," Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Berenberg Bank, said in a note Monday.
"However, Putin has probably little to offer beyond some words. He needs his weapons himself for his continued aggression against Ukraine," he noted.
Russia also has to tread a fine line between placating and assisting ally Iran and keeping the U.S. sweet, as it looks to re-establish ties with Donald Trump's Russia-friendlier administration.
"If Putin were to annoy Trump over Iran in any significant way, Trump may change tack and impose new heavy sanctions on Russia and/or weaken Putin's position in other ways," Schmieding said.
So far, Moscow's response to the escalating crisis has been muted, with Russia calling on Iran and Israel to negotiate a peaceful end to the crisis.
The Iranian conflict could strengthen Russia's position in Ukraine modestly, analysts say, as it distracts Western attention — and potentially resources — away from Ukraine. Higher oil prices could also mean more export revenue for oil producer Russia's war coffers.
At the same time, Russia is watching on as another Middle Eastern ally is weakened, eroding its own foothold in the region in the process. Russia has already seen one valuable alliance crumble recently by way of last year's ousting of Bashar al Assad's regime in Syria putting, which put the future of Moscow's air and naval bases in the country in doubt.
Russia stands to further lose out on potentially lucrative investments and infrastructure projects, if Iran is severely destabilized. The issue for Moscow is to now gauge how much it has to win or lose by helping or abandoning Iran.
"Moscow itself appears to be undecided what to make of a new war in the Middle East," Nikita Smagin, an expert on Iranian foreign and domestic policies at the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, said in analysis.
"On the one hand, Russia has invested heavily in various projects in Iran over the past three years, all of which could now go to waste. At the same time, Moscow hopes to benefit from Middle Eastern instability through rising oil prices and declining interest in Ukraine."
Ruling out the possibility of Russia giving Iran any military assistance, Smagin said the bigger issue for Moscow is the threat to all the Iranian ventures it has actively invested in recently, including oil and gas projects, infrastructure and transit routes.
"A few days before the start of the Israeli operation, the Iranian ambassador to Moscow said that Russia was the country's largest foreign investor in 2024. The ambassador did not specify any investment volumes, but Russian investments were estimated at $2.76 billion the previous year. Moscow planned to invest about $8 billion in oil and gas projects alone," Smagin said.
"Now the future of those projects is in doubt."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

31 minutes ago

• Yahoo

The Strait of Hormuz is a vital route for oil. Closing it could backfire on Iran

The war between Israel and Iran has raised concerns that Iran could retaliate by trying to close the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil chokepoint due to the large volumes of crude that pass through it every day. The U.S. military's strike on three sites in Iran over the weekend has raised questions about how its military might respond. The Strait of Hormuz is between Oman and Iran, which boasts a fleet of fast-attack boats and thousands of naval mines as well as missiles that it could use to make the strait impassable, at least for a time. Iran's main naval base at Bandar Abbas is on the north coast of the strait. It could also fire missiles from its long Persian Gulf shore, as its allies, Yemen's Houthi rebels, have done in the Red Sea. About 20 million barrels of oil per day, or around 20% of the world's oil consumption, passed through the strait in 2024. Most of that oil goes to Asia. Here is a look at the waterway and its impact on the global economy: An energy highway in a volatile region The strait connects the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. It's only 33 kilometers (21 miles) wide at its narrowest point, but deep enough and wide enough to handle the world's largest crude oil tankers. Oil that passes through the strait comes from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, and Bahrain, while major supplies of liquefied natural gas come from Qatar. At its narrowest point, the sea lanes for tankers lie in Omani waters, and before and after that cross into Iranian territory. While some global oil chokepoints can be circumvented by taking longer routes that simply add costs, that's not an option for most of the oil moving through the strait. That's because the pipelines that could be used to carry the oil on land, such as Saudi Arabia's East-West pipeline, they don't have nearly enough capacity. 'Most volumes that transit the strait have no alternative means of exiting the region,' according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Closing the Strait of Hormuz would send oil prices massively higher — at least at first If Iran blocked the strait, oil prices could shoot as high as $120-$130 per, at least temporarily, said Homayoun Falakshahi, head of crude oil analyst at Kpler, in an online webinar Sunday. That would deal an inflationary shock to the global economy — if it lasted. Analysts think it wouldn't. Asia would be directly impacted because 84% of the oil moving through the strait is headed for Asia; top destinations are China, India, Japan and South Korea. China gets 47% of its seaborne oil from the Gulf. China, however, has an oil inventory of 1.1 billion barrels, or 2 1/2 months of supply. U.S. oil customers would feel the impact of the higher prices but would not lose much supply. The U.S. imported only about 7% of its oil from Persian Gulf countries through the strait in 2024, according to the USEIA. That was the lowest level in nearly 40 years. Iran has good reasons not to block the strait Closing the strait would cut off Iran's own oil exports. While Iran does have a new terminal under construction at Jask, just outside the strait, the new facility has loaded oil only once and isn't in a position to replace the strait, according to Kpler analysts. Closure would hit China, Iran's largest trading partner and only remaining oil customer, and harm its oil-exporting Arab neighbors, who are at least officially supporting it in its war with Israel. And it would mean blocking Oman's territorial waters, offending a country that has served as a mediator between the U.S. and Iran. The US would likely intervene to reopen the strait Any price spike would probably not last. One big reason: Analysts expect that the U.S. Navy would intervene to keep the strait open. In the 1980s, U.S. warships escorted Kuwaiti oil tankers through the strait to protect them against Iranian attacks during the Iran-Iraq war. A price spike 'wouldn't last very long' and the strait would likely be reopened 'very fast,' said Kpler's Falakshahi. U.S. use of force to reopen the strait would likely be supported by Europe and 'even unofficially by China,' he said. 'Iran's navy would probably get destroyed in a matter of hours or days.' David Mchugh, The Associated Press

Politico

33 minutes ago

• Politico

White House tries to find messaging balance on Trump's regime change comment

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday sought to explain President Donald Trump's comment suggesting he's open to regime change in Iran, saying that the president 'believes the Iranian people can control their own destiny.' 'If the Iranian regime refuses to come to a peaceful, diplomatic solution, which the president is still interested and engaging in by the way, why shouldn't the Iranian people take away the power of this incredibly violent regime that has been suppressing them for decades?' Leavitt told Fox and Friends. She continued, 'Our posture has not changed. Our military posture has not changed. These were decisive precision strikes that were successful on Saturday evening. But the president is just simply raising a good question that many people around the world are asking.' Over the weekend, the U.S. bombed three Iranian nuclear sites — Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan — entering a conflict between Israel and Tehran just days after Trump said he would make a decision about joining the conflict in two weeks. Though administration officials have repeatedly said the White House did not strike the Iranian nuclear sites to bring about a regime change in the country, Trump floated the idea in a social media post. He did not, however, directly call for a change in Iranian leadership. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Trump said in a Truth Social post over the weekend. A White House official, granted anonymity to discuss the administration's stance, told POLITICO that if the Iranian people were to rise up against the current regime, Trump is not saying the U.S. would contribute — but they also said Trump isn't saying the U.S. wouldn't contribute. 'He's just saying the Iranian people control their own destiny and why wouldn't there be a regime change if the regime is refusing to do what's right by their people,' the official added. Leavitt also told ABC News on Monday that the administration is 'confident' the U.S. bombers 'completely and totally obliterated' all of Iran's nuclear sites. 'The President wouldn't have launched the strikes if we weren't confident in that,' she said. 'So this operation was a resounding success, and administration officials agree with that as well as Israel.' On Sunday, Vice President JD Vance said on NBC's Meet the Press that the strikes on Iran 'substantially delayed their development of a nuclear weapon. And that was the goal of this attack.' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has advocated for a change in Iranian leadership throughout his career. In recent weeks, Netanyahu has urged the U.S. to join its war against Iran if America wants to remain safe. Iran has already vowed retaliation for the strikes, worrying some about the safety of Americans in the region as well. But the White House official told POLITICO that 'immense preparations' were taken pre-strike to minimize American troops in the region in case of retaliation. On Monday, Leavitt said that the strikes were necessary to keep Americans both in the U.S. and the Middle East safe. 'Just to be clear, this strike on Saturday did make our homeland safer because it took away Iran's ability to create a nuclear bomb,' Leavitt said on Fox. 'This is a regime that threatens death to America and death to Israel and they no longer have the capability to build this nuclear weapon and threaten the world.' Megan Messerly contributed to this report.

Business Insider

34 minutes ago

• Business Insider

How Russia's overheating war economy could get a boost if the Iran conflict sends oil prices even higher

Oil prices spiked in the wake of the US entry into the Israel-Iran conflict, a development that could give a much-needed boost to Russia's war-weary economy. Brent crude, the international benchmark, traded around $76 on Monday, a day after the US bombed nuclear sites in Iran. That's up 14% from its price on June 12, the day Israel first targeted Iran's military leaders and nuclear program. Brent prices have climbed 26% from their low in early May. West Texas Intermediate crude traded around $74 a barrel, up 9% from the day of Israel's first attack. WTI prices are up 30% from their low last month. The price of Urals oil, Moscow's flagship crude blend, also rose to around $63 a barrel on June 13, up 8% from its price on May 1, according to data from Argus Media cited by Bloomberg. A report from The Institute for the Study of War flagged the positive knock-on effects on Russia's economy, with oil being Moscow's top export — dnd the revenue that the Kremlin brings in from its energy trade is a key lifeline for its war effort in Ukraine. Russia put its economy on a war footing after the full-scale invasion, with President Vladimir Putin making moves to boost the output of the country's defense-industrial base. Production of key weaponry, like highly destructive glide bombs, drones, and missiles, has gone up since the start of the war. Russia has also increased contract bonuses and soldier pay to expand its invasion force upwards of 600,000 troops. "Continued rising oil prices following Israeli strikes against Iran may increase Russian revenue from oil sales and improve Russia's ability to sustain its war effort, but only if the price of oil remains high and if Russian oil does not come under additional international sanctions," the thnk tank said in a report last week, before the US entered the conflict over the weekend. Armed conflict between Israel and Iran — which the US joined on Saturday — also jeopardizes the Strait of Hormuz, a highly important passage for oil shipments in the Middle East. Russia is less reliant on this key transit route. The country has pivoted to selling its oil to Asian customers after getting hit with sanctions, and has rerouted more of its oil through the Suez Canal and the Strait of Malacca, according to the Energy Information Administration. "As long as the Straight remains at risk, political appetite for additional sanctions on Russian oil will remain low," The Royal United Services Institute, an independent British research institution, wrote in a note. The jump in oil prices comes at a pivotal time for Russia's economy, which has been bearing the cost of its war against Ukraine for over three years. In May, the nation said it would pull out another $5.5 billion from its liquid reserves to balance the budget deficit, which tripled in 2025. Russia's oil and gas revenue also dropped 35% year-over-year that month. According to the nation's Finance Ministry, the liquid assets in Russia's National Wealth Fund stood at 2.8 trillion roubles, or around $35.7 billion, in May. Calculations by Bloomberg show that's down 68% since the start of the Ukraine War. Meanwhile, the Trump administration's monthslong efforts to bring Russia and Ukraine to the negotiating table for peace talks appear to be going nowhere. Kyiv has denounced Putin's terms as effectively amounting to an unacceptable capitulation.