logo
Why Russia hesitates to help Iran in conflict with Israel – DW – 06/17/2025

Why Russia hesitates to help Iran in conflict with Israel – DW – 06/17/2025

DW6 hours ago

Russia and Iran have long been economic and strategic partners. But despite a new defense pact, the Kremlin is unlikely to offer military aid to Iran in the conflict with Israel.
Since Israel began its recent attacks on Iran's nuclear infrastructure, Russian President Vladimir Putin has been in touch with world leaders about the conflict.
Right after the start of Israel's attacks last Friday, Putin spoke with both the Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Kremlin said.
In a statement on the Kremlin's website, the Russian leader "expressed his condolences to the leadership and people of Iran over the numerous human casualties" and "emphasized that Russia condemns Israel's actions, which were carried out in violation of the UN Charter and international law."
The next day, Putin once again condemned Israel's operation during a phone call with US President Donald Trump, a staunch supporter of Netanyahu.
Yet despite Russia's deepening alliance with Iran, the Kremlin is unlikely to provide military aid to its strategic partner.
Russia and Iran have long been strategic partners Image: Iranian Supreme Leader/AP Photo/picture alliance
Moscow's golden deal with Tehran
Given the economic ties between Russia and Iran, Putin's rebuke of Israel for attacking the Islamic Republic does not come as a surprise.
Iran has long been a close partner of Russia, not least because Western democracies heavily sanction both countries. Iran also recently joined BRICS, a group of non-Western nations with emerging economies that Russia helped to found.
Their relationship grew even closer after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Western allies accused Iran of supplying Russia with military drones, which were eventually used to attack Ukraine's civilian infrastructure as well. According to media reports, Moscow may have paid for the drones with at least 1.8 tons of gold bars, worth around $104 million, transferred to the Iranian company Sahara Thunder. Iran may also have asked Russia to help it realize its nuclear program.
Analysts believe Moscow wouldn't want to lose such a reliable partner.
"The Kremlin is acting according to an old Quranic principle: 'Fight and wage war, but do not transgress,'" Ruslan Suleymanov, a Middle East analyst based in Cairo, Egypt, tells DW. "In other words, Moscow, which has its interests and presence in the Middle East, would prefer to avoid any kind of uncontrollable chaos in the region."
Why Russian military aid to Iran is unlikely
Following the launch of Israel's attacks in Iran, the Iranian parliament ratified the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Russia. The deal was signed initially by the presidents of both countries in January and approved by the Russian parliament two months ago.
Despite its ambitious name, the treaty falls short of establishing a mutual defense pact. It does not oblige either side to provide military assistance in the event of an attack. Instead, it simply commits both parties to refrain from aiding their adversaries.
Last January, Iran president Pezeshkian visited Russia to sign a partnership agreement Image: Evgenia Novozhenina/Pool/File Photo/REUTERS
Middle East analyst Marianna Belenkaya, who left Russia after the outbreak of the war in Ukraine and now resides in Israel, believes Moscow is highly unlikely to offer Iran any direct military support, at least not in any official or public capacity.
"It has no need to, especially as it is trying to restore or improve relations with Washington, although some behind-the-scenes involvement can't be ruled out entirely." Belenkaya reckons.
Russia as a mediator for Iran
Belenkaya says Putin is sincere in his recent public offers to act as a mediator between Iran and its opponents. According to her, Putin reportedly advised Iran's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, to return to the negotiating table last year.
Trump said in a recent interview with the US news network ABC News that he was open to Russia mediating the Israel-Iran conflict.
Belenkaya believes that Russia, "probably can't put pressure on Iran the way the US did," as a mediator, "but it can serve as a channel of communication."
During the indirect talks between the US and Iran in April, Russia was indeed expected to play a significant role in the event of a nuclear deal with Iran. The Guardian newspaper reported that Moscow was being considered as a potential destination for Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium and could also serve as an impartial arbiter in case of any breaches in the agreement. This arrangement suggested that Russia would bring Iran's highly enriched uranium back to the country if the US breached the deal.
If such a deal were struck, Germany, France, and the UK, would lose their roles as guarantors under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal that Trump pulled the US out of in 2018.
The aftermath of a recent Russian attack on Kyiv Image: Efrem Lukatsky/AP Photo/picture alliance
Kremlin's chance to advance in Ukraine
At the same time, experts believe the Kremlin must be enjoying the West's distraction from its ongoing war against Ukraine. On Tuesday, Russia launched one of its deadliest attacks on Kyiv in recent months, killing 14 and injuring dozens.
At the same time, G7 leaders seek to tackle the Middle East escalation at the group's current summit in Canada. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz had said beforehand that the issue would be "very high on the agenda."
Meanwhile, a June 17 meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy appears to have been called off after Trump's early departure from the G7 summit.
Suleimanov, the Cairo-based Middle East analyst, underscored that it's in the Kremlin's best interest that American and European leaders are distracted from what's happening in Ukraine.
"Against this backdrop, Putin may seize the opportunity to launch an offensive or cause some other kind of trouble," Suleimanov said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Former Fox News Favorite Declares Network a 'Propaganda Hose' Aimed at Manipulating 'Elderly' Viewers
Former Fox News Favorite Declares Network a 'Propaganda Hose' Aimed at Manipulating 'Elderly' Viewers

Int'l Business Times

time21 minutes ago

  • Int'l Business Times

Former Fox News Favorite Declares Network a 'Propaganda Hose' Aimed at Manipulating 'Elderly' Viewers

Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson is accusing the network he once called home of operating as a "propaganda hose" aimed at manipulating its older viewers into supporting war, including the latest U.S. entanglement in Iran . Carlson, once one of Fox News' most influential and highest-rated personalities, has increasingly broken from the Trump-aligned right in recent months. His departure from the network in 2023 marked the beginning of a shift, with Carlson growing more outspoken against U.S. foreign policy, particularly military involvement in the Middle East. Appearing on Steve Bannon's War Room podcast, Carlson condemned Fox News and its primetime personalities, most notably Sean Hannity, for cheerleading Israeli strikes on Iran and pushing for U.S. military involvement. He called out what he described as the network's deliberate effort to stir pro-war sentiment among "elderly" viewers. "What they are doing is what they always do, which is just turning up the propaganda hose to full blast and just trying to knock elderly Fox viewers off their feet and make them subject to more wars," Carlson said. He specifically named Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch and pro-Israel donors Miriam Adelson and Ike Perlmutter as part of what he described as a "warmonger" faction pushing Trump toward deeper conflict. "Who are the warmongers? They would include anyone who's calling Donald Trump today to demand air strikes and other direct US military involvement in a war with Iran. On that list: Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Rupert Murdoch, Ike Perlmutter and Miriam Adelson. At some point they will all have to answer for this, but you should know their names now," he added. Carlson also released a sharply worded newsletter titled "This Could Be the Final Newsletter Before All-Out War," in which he accused Trump of complicity and warned of looming catastrophe. "Despite being complicit in the act of war," Carlson wrote, "the president hopes last night's events will help his ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran." When asked about Carlson's blistering critique, Trump dismissed him with a shrug: "I don't know what Tucker Carlson is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen." Originally published on Latin Times

Israel-Iran conflict: Where exactly does Trump stand? – DW – 06/17/2025
Israel-Iran conflict: Where exactly does Trump stand? – DW – 06/17/2025

DW

timean hour ago

  • DW

Israel-Iran conflict: Where exactly does Trump stand? – DW – 06/17/2025

US President Donald Trump calls himself a "peacemaker" — but also labeled Iran's Supreme Leader an "easy target." So where does he really stand, and are he and Israeli PM Netanyahu on the same page? Israel's assault on Iran was discussed with Washington before it was launched. "There were no surprises here," said Fox News anchor Brett Bair after an interview with US President Donald Trump last Friday. The US government has made clear that it was not actively involved in the attack, though questions arose on whether this would remain so when the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz was rerouted from the South China Sea to the Middle East. And on Tuesday, Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social that the US knew the exact location of Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. "He is an easy target, but is safe there," Trump wrote. "We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now." On the campaign trail ahead of the 2024 US presidential election, Trump never tired of repeating that he had no desire to allow the US to get caught up in global military conflicts. In his January 2025 inaugural address, Trump called himself a "peacemaker," pledging to use the might of the US to "stop all wars and bring a new spirit of unity" to the world. Speaking in Saudi Arabia in May, he announced the dawn of a new era of peace in the Middle East. The front page of an Iranian newspaper reporting on recent nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran Image: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images What's Trump's stance on Iran? Not much remains of this peaceful attitude in the wake of Israel's full-on assault on Iran. On Monday night, Trump wrote on Truth Social that "everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran." In a previous post, he wrote that he had given Tehran's leaders "chance after chance" to sign a new nuclear deal, warning that if they failed to sign one, Iran would face an attack worse than anything they could imagine. Trump wrote that hardliners who had come out against an agreement "are all dead now," adding, "it will only get worse!" Delegations from both nations have met several times since April, with the aim of negotiating a replacement treaty for the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) deal that Trump withdrew the US from in 2018. Trump claims his aim has always been to ensure that Iran can never build a nuclear weapon — which was also the aim of the JCPOA. Beyond military and civilian targets, Israel's attacks also hit Iranian nuclear sites. An attack on Iran's state broadcaster: Tehran appears incapable of protecting critical infrastructure from Israeli assault Image: IRIB Is Israel leading the US into war? So where does Donald Trump actually stand in this conflict between the hardline governments of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Iran? British-Israeli political scientist Daniel Levy, president of the non-profit research institute US/Middle East Project, suggests Israel may have convinced the US that a military attack against Iran could help advance nuclear talks between Washington and Tehran. Levy also told DW it was no coincidence that Israel had chosen this moment to attack. "I think one of the primary motivating factors for Netanyahu was to act now because were there a break-through in the talks, he would probably feel sufficiently constrained by the Americans not to act." In any case, Trump decided not to red light Netanyahu's attack on Iran, wrote Willian F. Wechsler, in a blog post for the US think tank Atlantic Council, where he is director of the Middle East program. There was no specific demand that Israel refrain from attacking, therefore, "we should assume that Israeli leaders would have interpreted the absence of an American red light as a de facto green light," wrote Wechsler. Trump stuck in the middle In May, Trump made headlines by firing his national security advisor, Michael Waltz, who had created headaches for the administration by erroneously adding a well-known journalist to a chat group discussing secret US military plans on the messenger service Signal. But research by the Washington Post newspaper found that something else had in fact led to Waltz's firing: Trump's advisor is said to have had intense discussions with Prime Minister Netanyahu about possible military options for dealing with Iran — and that, prior to Netanyahu's visit to the White House. The paper wrote that Waltz, "wanted to take US policy in a direction Trump wasn't comfortable with…" Was National Security Advisor Michael Waltz fired for pushing policies Trump wasn't comfortable with? Image: Ben Curtis/AP Photo/picture alliance So where does the US commander-in-chief stand exactly? Does he oppose military action against Iran, or does he see it as grounds for celebration? In Levy's view, the US president is tacking back and forth because his own MAGA (Make America Great Again) base is highly divided on the issue of military deployments in the Middle East. There's "a fissure in MAGA-world," says Levy. On one side, there are those who are all in on Trump's "America first" approach that puts US interests above all else. The last thing this group wants is for the US to become involved in a distant conflict that they feel does not directly affect them. On the other side are Trump's many conservative Jewish-American and evangelical Christian supporters, who believe the US must support Israel — even militarily if necessary — no matter what. Levy says the situation is risky. "There's also a question here of whether the rest of the world will see an America that can be led by the nose into a military confrontation by an ally who acts out of turn," says the political scientist. "That's not a good message to send." Israel-Iran conflict: 'Deciding factor is likely Washington' To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video This article was originally published in German and was translated by Jon Shelton. Edited by: Jess Smee

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store