Will Russia stand up for its ally Iran and how can Moscow benefit?

Russia's foreign ministry slammed on Sunday the overnight US air strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, calling it 'an irresponsible decision to subject the territory of a sovereign state to missile and bomb strikes, no matter what arguments it is presented with' — all the while Moscow itself is intensifying its attacks on Ukraine.
The Kremlin says the US attack 'blatantly violates international law, the UN Charter, and the resolutions of the UN Security Council, which has previously unambiguously qualified such actions as inadmissible' adding that 'It is particularly alarming that the strikes were carried out by a country that is a permanent member of the UN Security Council'.
Russia, the permanent member of the UN Security Council itself, has been waging its unprovoked all-out war against Ukraine since February 2022, bombing Ukrainian cities and attacking Ukraine on the ground.
'We urge to stop the aggression, to step up efforts to create conditions for returning the situation to the political and diplomatic track,' the Moscow statement said, referring to the US strikes.
At the St Petersburg forum before Washington's strike, Vladimir Putin said that Iran had not asked for help since the beginning of Israel's air campaign.
The Russian president added that the comprehensive partnership treaty between Moscow and Tehran has no articles related to the military sphere, which is ironic, given Russian production of Iranian developed Shahed-136 drones (aka the Geranium-2).
Euronews spoke with Nikita Smagin, an orientalist and author of the book "All Iran. The paradoxes of life in an autocracy under sanctions" about what is at stake for the Kremlin.
Smagin says the Russian side has previously emphasised that its alliance with Iran is not a 'military one' and Moscow is therefore not obliged to provide it with military assistance.
"It is logical to expect that Russia will not interfere in what is happening, because it does not want to risk for the sake of Iran the aggravation of the situation with Israel and the United States," the expert says.
Smagin notes that Tehran's decision not to request military intervention from Moscow before the US strikes is not surprising.
"The Islamic Republic was built from the very beginning on the ideas of sovereignty," he says, adding that one of the driving ideas behind the restructuring of the Iranian state was to put an end to the interference of foreign players, primarily the US and the UK, in Iran's internal affairs.
"In this sense, Iran has never turned to Russia for help and is not turning to Russia now because it is afraid of losing some sovereignty, of giving up some of its sovereignty to Russia, as was the case with Bashar al-Assad," Smagin says.
But the situation could change.
"If only because Putin drew attention to the fact that he does not even want to think about the assassination, the destruction of Khamenei, it is obvious that these issues are somewhat disturbing to him," the expert explains.
'The fate of authoritarian leaders hurts Russia'
According to US President Donald Trump, Washington knows "exactly" where Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is "hiding".
Trump also said that the Iranian leader is "an easy target, but they will not kill him, at least not yet".
If the Islamic Republic's regime falls or if it comes to physically destroying the Ayatollah, how will the Kremlin react to this? What would it mean for the Russian authorities?
"In general, we see that the deaths in revolutionary processes, the destruction of heads of authoritarian states in general hurts the Russian side. We remember how Putin reacted to the assassination of Gaddafi," notes Nikita Smagin.
The rebels were primarily operating there, but not without the assistance of foreign forces, including British intelligence and the Emirates. But nevertheless, all this looked like a serious "wake-up call" for Putin. And, apparently, this was one of the reasons why he began to change his positioning in the international arena.
According to the analyst, if the Islamic Republic collapses, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei may well be granted asylum in Russia.
"This is already an established practice. I think it is not that it is excluded. But if Khamenei is eliminated, it will not cause any joy in the Kremlin. They believe that killing leaders is a red line, beyond which in fact Israel has already crossed. It has already eliminated Hezbollah leaders, for example," he says.
'It will be easier to draw up the budget'
The new crisis in the Middle East may hit Russia's influence in the region, but the sudden escalation has brought the Kremlin some good news. At the G7 summit in Canada, for example, it was decided not to lower the price threshold for Russian oil so as not to further destabilise the market.
Since the end of 2022, one of the key aspects of leverage on Moscow has been the establishment of price ceilings for Russian oil at $60 per barrel.
Three and a half years into Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the EU has proposed lowering the price ceiling to $45 per barrel, but it will have to wait for now.
"If we take disintegration in Iran as a whole, or rather regime change, because disintegration (of the country) is already a concomitant, then, of course, it threatens Russia's interests in the long term," says Nikita Smagin.
"The Kremlin, of course, expects to benefit from this in the short term: oil prices will go up very seriously. The worse the situation gets, the higher the prices will be and the easier it will be for the [Russian] budget to be drawn up - this year, by the looks of it, there could be problems with it," the analyst explains.
According to Smagin, Russia will benefit in the current moment, but in the longer term, regime change and "turning Iran into some permanent point of instability threatens, of course, Russia's strategy in the Middle East, because a lot of effort has been invested in Iran."
"Iran has been a reliable partner of the Kremlin on many fronts, " he says.
"A lot of projects, and strategically important ones at that, were planned to be conducted through Iran, for example, the [transport corridor] North-South project, a possible gas hub. This, of course, is all for the future, but nevertheless, in the event [of the regime's collapse] there will be no possibility of realising it. In the long term, it will be a loss and a setback for the Russian side."
'The peak of Russia's military cooperation with Iran has long passed'
In more than three years of full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia has succeeded in "localising" the production of Iranian-designed drones.
According to Nikita Smagin, Iran's importance as a supplier of Shahed-136 drones is in the past. The peak of military co-operation between the two countries came in 2022. As the expert notes, at the beginning of last year, up to 90% of components were not Iranian. "Only the engines were supplied from Iran. Everything else was made by Russia," he adds.
"Even if localisation is not 100 percent now, it is very close to that. I think Russia will find ways to replace that, not to mention that the Shaheds don't play as big a role as they used to."
"Still, there is a huge amount of in-house development. Russia has been investing in drones during this time," Smagin explains.
"Moreover: even if we're talking about the Shahed specifically, it's not even strongly Iranian anymore. The Geran-1 and Geran-2 drones are very much redesigned, because the Iranian version was not as effective as many expected," he notes.
In an interview with Kommersant, Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, describes the Shaheds' flight characteristics as "primitive" and "allowing them to be shot down en masse even with 7.62 mm anti-aircraft machine guns."
He also writes of the "moped" engine sound, "alerting the entire neighbourhood to the drone's arrival."
'In Israel, Russia's role as a mediator is looked upon with no apparent antipathy'
As Hannah Notte, a political scientist and expert at the James Martin Centre for Nonproliferation Studies, writes, Russia has always had limitations on how far it can go in supporting Iran.
"The Kremlin's obsessive anti-Western agenda has raised the Islamic republic's profile as a partner, but Putin has other interests in the region - such as a long-standing, albeit complicated, relationship with Israel and the need to coordinate oil prices with OPEC - so he has been mindful of Israel's and the Gulf states' red lines when it comes to defence cooperation with Tehran," Notte wrote in a column for US outlet The Atlantic.
Nikita Smagin believes that in the current conflict between Iran and Israel, Russia is no longer an "indispensable" mediator.
"When the nuclear negotiations were going on, when Trump was trying to sign a nuclear deal with Iran, here Russia could act as an indispensable mediator," he says.
"It was actually the only party that had the technical capability and was ready to export surplus uranium from Iran, pre-weapons grade or enriched beyond the required minimum per cent. Now, apparently, this issue is off the agenda".
At the same time, despite the fact that relations between Israel and Russia, which became the first country in the world to receive a Hamas delegation after the 7 October attacks officially, have deteriorated, according to Smagin, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem look at Russia's role as a mediator "without any obvious antipathy".
As Smagin notes, even after Moscow's invasion of 2022 and the subsequent wave of immigration in an attempt to avoid mobilisation, "a large number of agents of anti-Russian influence have appeared in the Jewish state, people who moved from Russia and have a very negative attitude to the Russian authorities and are obviously the backbone of anti-Russian sentiments in Israel."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

France 24

an hour ago

• France 24

Russia and China push for a ceasefire as UN Security Council meets on Iran

The UN Security Council met on Sunday to discuss US strikes on Iran's nuclear sites as Russia, China and Pakistan proposed the 15-member body adopt a resolution calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in the Middle East. It was not immediately clear when it could be put to a vote. Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 865 people and wounded 3,396 more, the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists said Sunday. The three countries circulated the draft text, said diplomats, and asked members to share their comments by Monday evening. A resolution needs at least nine votes in favour and no vetoes by the United States, France, Britain, Russia or China to pass. The US is likely to oppose the draft resolution, seen by Reuters, which also condemns attacks on Iran 's nuclear sites and facilities. The text does not name the United States or Israel. US bombs Iran: UN security council to convene on Sunday 08:44 "The bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States marks a perilous turn in a region that is already reeling," UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council on Sunday. "We now risk descending into a rathole of retaliation after retaliation." "We must act – immediately and decisively – to halt the fighting and return to serious, sustained negotiations on the Iran nuclear programme," Guterres said. The world awaited Iran's response on Sunday after President Donald Trump said the US had "obliterated" Tehran's key nuclear sites, joining Israel in the biggest Western military action against the Islamic Republic since its 1979 revolution. UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi told the Security Council that while craters were visible at Iran's enrichment site buried into a mountain at Fordow, "no one – including the IAEA – is in a position to assess the underground damage." Grossi said entrances to tunnels used for the storage of enriched material appear to have been hit at Iran's sprawling Isfahan nuclear complex, while the fuel enrichment plant at Natanz has been struck again. "Iran has informed the IAEA there has been no increase in off-site radiation levels at all three sites," said Grossi, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency. "Armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place and could result in radioactive releases with grave consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the State which has been attacked", he added. Iran requested the UN Security Council meeting, calling on the 15-member body "to address this blatant and unlawful act of aggression, to condemn it in the strongest possible terms". Israel's UN Ambassador Danny Danon said in a statement on Sunday that the US and Israel "do not deserve any condemnation, but rather an expression of appreciation and gratitude for making the world a safer place". Danon told reporters before the council meeting that it was still early when it came to assessing the impact of the US strikes. When asked if Israel was pursuing regime change in Iran, Danon said: "That's for the Iranian people to decide, not for us."

Euronews

2 hours ago

• Euronews

Hundreds take to the street in the Hague to demonstrate against NATO

Hundreds of people gathered on Sunday to protest against NATO, rising military spending, and the risk of war with Iran. The protest comes two days before a summit of the alliance in The Hague, where leaders are expected to discuss increasing defence budgets. 'Let's invest in peace and sustainable energy,' Belgian politician Joe d'Haese said addressing a crowd in a park near the summit location. Although the protest focused on NATO and the war in Gaza, many Iranians joined in response to Sunday's attacks carried out by the United States on three key Iranian nuclear sites. Demonstrators were seen holding signs reading 'No Iran War,' and "Hands off Iran." 'We are opposed to war. People want to live a peaceful life,' said 74-year-old Hossein Hamadani, an Iranian living in the Netherlands. "Things are not good. So why do we spend money on war?' he added. Arno van der Veen, spokesperson for the Counter Summit Coalition for Peace and Justice, which organised the protest, said the role of NATO has become problematic now that the US decided to join Israel in the war in Iran. "If there is a retaliation from Iran now, which would be just and legitimate under international law, then we, as the Netherlands, would also be at war with Iran," he told Euronews. "The next step is a nuclear war. And that is what we are incredibly worried about, and why we can see that the moment you buy more weapons, the chances increase that you will also use them. And that is life-threatening," he warned. Anti-NATO activists are often criticised for having a supposedly pro-Russian stance. Van der Veen emphasised, however, that his organisation stands against Russian imperialism, while also opposing US imperialism. "They are both now trying to divide the natural resources in the ground in Ukraine," he said. "The population of Ukraine is the victim of this war, and also the population of Russia, because they are all sent into the army." The Netherlands is hosting the annual NATO summit, starting Tuesday, with world leaders meeting on Wednesday. Leaders plan to agree on higher defence spending, as pushed by US President Donald Trump. Talks were nearly complete last week, until Spain's Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez told NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte that asking Spain to spend 5% of its GDP on defence was 'unreasonable and counterproductive.' Since Russia invaded Ukraine over three years ago, NATO countries have increased defence spending. But nearly a third still do not meet the current 2% target. The summit is under tight security, with the largest safety operation ever in the Netherlands, called 'Orange Shield.' It involves thousands of police and military officers, drones, no-fly zones, and cybersecurity teams.

Euronews

4 hours ago

• Euronews

Exclusive: Israel blasts EU report claiming Gaza human rights breaches

Israel has blasted the EU-Israel Association Agreement (EUSR) review, saying 'this report and its conclusions should not be taken seriously or used as a basis for any future actions or conversations', in a letter from the country's foreign ministry to the EU seen by Euronews on Sunday. 'Decency would dictate addressing the report's shortcomings and dismissing it in its entirety,' the letter, sent to the Commission and External Action Service, concludes. The EU-Israel Association Agreement review released on Friday said that Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip indicate a breach of the human rights provisions contained in its Association Agreement with the European Union. The issue is set to be considered by foreign ministers meeting on Monday. Citing a collection of findings by independent international organisations, the highly anticipated review from the bloc's diplomatic service said it found "indications" that Israel breached its human rights obligations with actions in Gaza. The breach stems from Israel's offensive on Gaza and the stringent conditions applied to the deliveries of humanitarian aid, which have stoked fears of widespread famine among Palestinians living in the densely populated enclave. In the letter seen by Euronews, the Israeli foreign ministry expressed its 'astonishment' that the report disregarded 'our detailed response to the questions submitted to us'. The letter starts with a presentation of what it calls 'the strategic reality Israel is facing', detailing how it is 'fighting a war on seven fronts.' 'It is against this backdrop – Israel's combat with a host of brutal enemies - that the EUSR was tasked with doing a 'rush job', compiling a biased and extremely one-sided summary of many anti-Israeli voices and documents into a so-called 'honest report' for the Member States of the EU,' the letter states. The Israeli foreign ministry letter focuses on what it calls 'two failures' of the EUSR report, claiming that it 'fails to take into account the context' and 'crucial facts' the October 7 attacks followed by 'the ongoing attempt by Iran and its proxies to bring about the annihilation of the Jewish state'. 'A report that opens with an admission that it lacks the ability to verify its own statements, or even the mandate to address the numerous terror attacks by Palestinians against Israel, cannot be taken seriously,' the letter says. The letter claims that the EUSR report 'fails morally' by neglecting to address any damage inflicted on Israeli civilians' by Hamas' control of the Gaza strip and its actions against Israelis, including what it calls 'the proven complicity of UN bodies such as UNRWA.' 'The report aims to deny Israel's right to defend itself against terrorism. It does not cite any of the many positive actions undertaken by Israel in the humanitarian field and neglects to mention the continuous refusal by Hamas of a US-brokered hostage deal (the 'Witkoff Proposal') which Israel has agreed to,' the letter says. Secondly, the Israeli foreign ministry letter claims that the EUSR report also 'fails methodologically'. No opportunity to defend itself, Israel claims 'Israel was not given an opportunity to defend itself against the extreme accusations mounted on it. Regretfully, even a person facing dismissal from a job, receives more leeway to state his or her case, than the complete disregard the EUSR has shown toward the objective facts and evidence of the State of Israel," the letter claims. The EUSR did not adhere to due process, it alleges, choosing not to engage Israel in dialogue over the report. The EUSR also did not allow Israeli information to be included in the report; and in fact, even when Israel thoroughly detailed its position in communication– offering detailed answers on several topics - the information presented was neither added nor addressed in the report,' the letter states. The letter insists on 'Israel's Compliance with International Law', and claims that 'a simple dialogue with Israeli authorities could have made these facts clear. Israel is a democratic state abiding by IHL and international law, while fighting to survive in a region void of democracy and full of terrorism and radicalism. Its actions should be judged fairly and honestly, a process at which the report in question has failed.' 'Throughout the war against Hamas, Israel has facilitated the transfer of large quantities of humanitarian aid into Gaza, even under fire,' the letter says in response to the EUSR report, which speaks about the blockade of humanitarian assistance, military strikes against hospitals, the forced displacement of the Palestinian population, mass arrests, arbitrary detentions, the expansion of settlements, which are illegal under international law, in the Occupied Territories, and the violence committed by settlers. According to the EUSR report, the violations are described as numerous and serious. The internal review exercise was launched last month at the request of 17 countries, led by the Netherlands, to determine whether Israel was still complying with Article 2 of the Association Agreement, which states bilateral relations "shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this agreement". The Israeli foreign ministry response concludes that the EUSR report 'is absurd and reflects an unprecedented process directed at a democratic state in the midst of war,' and that it 'completely ignores the circumstances, as well as the substantive comments and responses provided by Israel.' The stern response by Israel's foreign ministry appears to echo the statements made by Israel's ambassador to the EU and NATO Haim Regev, on Thursday 19 June. In an interview with Euronews, ambassador Regev was clear and firm about his government's current interactions with the European Union on the crisis with Iran and about Israel's actions in Gaza, saying 'we hear different tones, but at the end of the road we see and we feel the support.' The Israeli government has 'a continuous and intensive interaction' with the top EU institutions in Brussels, but 'of course it is complicated when it comes to have one position in the Union composed of 27 member states,' the Israeli diplomat said. 'There is a war right now and Israel is actually leading this war against Iran, that this is the war also for the benefit, for the long run of Europe. So this is not the time right now to examine or to push things or to try to put obstacles in the Israel-EU relations," Regev concluded. The Commission and External Action Service have been approached for comment.