Tag: Pezeshkian

  • Will Russia stand up for its ally Iran, and how can Moscow benefit from the conflict?

    Will Russia stand up for its ally Iran after US struck three Iranian nuclear facilities? What is stronger: the desire to make money on expensive oil and divert the world’s attention from Moscow’s war on Ukraine or the fear of losing the ties and contracts built up over the years in the region?

    ADVERTISEMENT

    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).FILE: Vladimir Putin and Masoud Pezeshkian in MoscowFILE: Vladimir Putin and Masoud Pezeshkian in Moscow
    AP Photo

    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.FILE: Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali KhameneiFILE: Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
    Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader via AP

    ‘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”.FILE: Flowers left in front of the Israeli embassy in Moscow after Hamas' 7 October attackFILE: Flowers left in front of the Israeli embassy in Moscow after Hamas’ 7 October attack
    AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko

    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.”

  • Why Israel and Iran's uneasy truce may not last

    Middle East’s Nuclear Puzzle Gets Even More Tricky

    The past 12‑day showdown turned the nuclear conversation from a calm espresso to a full‑blown French kiss—only the kind that leaves everyone a little hot and unsure of who to trust. Now Iran is staring straight at the moon, wondering whether the United States or the United Nations’ pesky atomic watchdog is the safer side of this cosmic tango.

    What’s Really Going On?

    • US Invasion – They waltzed in with the classic “weird‑neighbor” vibes but with a side of military drums.
    • UN “Mystery Man” – The atom watchdog, playing its patience card, keeps a stern watch over potential nuclear shenanigans.
    • Iran’s Skepticism – They’re still picking their words. Is the U.S. a friend in disguise? Or is the UN merely a referee with a whistle that sometimes rattles the wrong bowl?

    Why the Finger‑Pointing Is Hilariously Complex

    A nation that’s once been the puzzle piece to a larger geopolitical jigsaw now feels like it’s holding a toy gun—only there’s no one really wanting a full‑blown gunfight. The deep trust issues, the flippy diplomatic gestures, and the ever‑present nuclear standoff all turn a simple conflict into a hot‑pot of confusing statements.

    Bottom Line: Keep Your Eyes on the Dancing Fireworks

    Below the curtain, the Middle East’s nuclear saga gets a mind‑bending twist, as Iran weighs the US’s military footfalls against the UN’s bureaucratic sidestep. In a region where every move is a headline, the real drama is figuring out who is the boss of the nuclear game show. Stay tuned, because the next act is sure to have more twists than a plot from a mid‑season thriller.

    What a Wild Ride: The 12‑Day Showdown that’s Left Us Guessing

    Just over a week ago, the United States dropped the “show‑stopper” on two of the region’s biggest rivals, forcing a ceasefire that ended an all‑out air war. But with the truce hanging by a thread and the future of an Iran nuclear deal still up in the air, it’s hard to know what’s next.

    Dates and Drama

    • June 13 – Israeli jets launch a massive strike, wiping out senior Revolutionary Guard commanders and unleashing a barrage of ballistic missiles.
    • Fire‑power spills over into Iran’s nuclear sites, giving Israel the story that “Tehran is closer to a nuclear weapon.”
    • Iran responds by firing missiles at Israeli military sites, infrastructure, and even cities.
    • June 24 – Washington negotiates a fragile peace a day after targeting three of Iran’s key nuclear establishments.

    Are We Back at the Negotiation Table?

    When the fighting began, the US and Tehran were already in talks about Iran’s nuclear program. Now, after the bombings, the back‑and‑forth is a bit… well, a bit tangled.

    Words from the Front Lines

    Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told CBS that renewing talks quickly is a “no‑go” for the moment. He said: “The end of US military threats is a precondition for the resumption of talks between Tehran and Washington.”

    Meanwhile, President Donald Trump hinted that diplomacy could be back on the table “as early as this week.” Techy timing, if you ask us.

    Wrap‑Up: A Truce With a Twist

    In short, we’ve had a short, explosive war that ended with a fragile ceasefire—and yet the big questions remain: Will the peace hold? Will the Iran nuclear deal ever materialize? One thing’s clear: The next chapters in this saga will be written in real time.

    Iran sidelines UN nuclear watchdog

    Trump said last week that he would consider carrying out fresh strikes on Iran if the country was found to be enriching uranium to concerning levels.
    Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, said on Sunday that the US strikes on the three nuclear sites in Iran — Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan — had hugely hampered its capacity to enrich uranium.

    Related

    US Senate rejects effort to restrain Trump on Iran as GOP backs his strikes on nuclear sitesExperts will assess damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities, Tehran’s ambassador to Greece says

    However, he warned that Tehran could be producing enriched uranium “in a matter of months”.
    Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian on Wednesday ordered the country to halt its cooperation with the IAEA, according to state media. The country’s trust in the agency is now broken, Pezeshkian told French President Emmanuel Macron in a call on Sunday.
    Satellite images dated 29 June that were released by US aerospace firm Maxar Technologies show activity at the Fordow site, one of Iran’s main uranium enrichment centres, which was hit by the US B-2 bombers.FILE: A B-2 bomber arrives at Whiteman Air Force Base Mo., Sunday, June 22, 2025, after returning from a massive strike on Iranian nuclear sites

    Bold B‑2 Drops in Kansas After Massive Iran Strike

    In a moment that made headlines and eyebrows rise, a Blue‑Hornet B‑2 bomber touched down at Whiteman Air Force Base in Wichita, Missouri, the very same day it carried out a highly publicized barrage on Iranian nuclear facilities.

    What Went Down

    • Our stealth bomber, with a sleek black outline that looks like a UFO on a rainy night, landed on the field after completing its mission over the Middle East.
    • The strike targeted iranian sites that had been under close scrutiny by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
    • On the ground, workers and engineers were busy fixing huge ventilation vents, the backbone of those underground arsenals.

    IAEA: From Open Lunch to Secret Dinner

    Until the conflict erupted, the IAEA had a “beyond the walls” kind of access to ex‑Iranian enrichment plants. Now, under a new policy passed Wednesday, any future inspection requires a thumbs‑up from the Supreme National Security Council. The move feels like the agency went from “open‑minded coffee shop” to “tight‑knit spy club.”

    Safety? The Biggest Question

    “How can we guarantee that the inspectors are safe when our own peaceful facilities were hit only a few days ago?” asked an anonymous Iranian diplomatic source in a conversation with Euronews. The answer? A mix of diplomatic tight‑rope walking and a few too many coffee breaks.

    Let’s Wrap It Up

    While the world watches the fallout from the strike and the new IAEA restrictions, we’re left wondering if diplomatic chatter can be as smooth as the B‑2’s descent. For now, the craft is parked, the base is quiet, and the headlines keep flipping. Stay tuned for the next chapter—maybe it’ll include a little humor, a dollop of emotion, and enough chatter to keep Google happy.

    Agreement unlikely

    While the conflict may have been considered brief by Israel and the US, for Tehran’s leadership, the war remains essentially unresolved, despite the ceasefire.
    Unsurprising, perhaps, given that Tehran has put the death toll of the war on its citizens at 935 — including 38 children and 132 women.
    Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has said there are ‘ample regional opportunities’ for stabilisation after the twelve-day conflict, but this remains to be seen.
    According to Raffaele Marchetti, director of the Centre for International and Strategic Studies at Luiss University in Rome, Tehran’s leadership is opposed to the ultimate strategic goal of Israel and the US, which is not only that of a denuclearised Iran.FILE: An excavator removes the rubble of a destroyed building hit by an Israeli airstrike on early Tuesday, in Tehran, Iran, Thursday, June 26, 2025

    Rubble Under Silt: The Unseen Cost of Skies in Tehran

    An excavator rakes away the shattered remnants of a building that fell to an Israeli airstrike early on Tuesday. The site, still echoing with dust and echoing memories, now breathes a new, quieter rhythm as the machines work under the Tehran sun.

    Why the Strikes Matter

    • Israel says every strike is a strategic safeguard, a move to keep national security tight and fortified.
    • Iran, on the other hand, keeps its eyes on a bigger chessboard: creating a calm balance in the region by sharing a mutual “nuclear shield” with its neighbors.

    Iran’s Nuclear Journey

    While it’s no surprise that Iran has been pursuing nuclear development, those on the sidelines say caution is paramount. The nuclear-non-proliferation treaty, which Iran has respected outright, stands in razor‑sharp contrast to Israel’s stance.

    Can Dialogue Turn the Tides?

    • Officials say a real agreement is a distant dream unless one side swallows a bit of the other’s appetite.
    • Some experts suggest that a regime shift in either country could eventually unravel the stalemate.

    Behind the Headlines

    When you look at the landscape of the Middle East, you find a very fair share of knotty truths and tugging at the hearts of nations. Every pound of rubble reflects a complex story of calculations, courage, and, often – a pinch of hope that the next day might finally tilt the scales toward peace.

    Iran fears Israel’s regional hegemony

    Israel’s Nuclear Mystery: The Great Strategic Dance

    Picture this: a country that keeps its secrets tighter than a pop star’s new album. Israel has never publicly said “yes” or “no” about holding nuclear weapons. Instead it plays the game of deliberate strategic ambiguity—keeping enemies guessing so they can’t risk a misstep.

    History to Remember

    • In the 1970s, when Iran was ruled by the Shah, that trio—Israel, Iran, and Turkey—did what the cool kids did in the “extended Middle East” (think Caucasus and Central Asia): they stuck together against the Soviet Union.
    • Back then, the three nations were tight as friends at a block party—politically and militarily aligned, because the world was simpler and the stakes were a bit lower.
    • Fast forward to today: Iran’s rhetoric has shifted from partnership to outright chant about destroying Israel. Talk about a mood swing!

    Doctrines? Or Postcards?

    Neither country has an official public nuclear playbook:

    • Israel doesn’t admit it has a nuclear arsenal and refuses to declare one, playing the mystique card.
    • Iran says its nuclear program is all about science and energy—electrons, not bombs. In reality, most estimates place their stockpile at 90 to 400 warheads.

    What Does “Ultimate Weapon” Really Mean?

    David Rigoulet‑Roze — a sharp-staffed Middle East scholar from the Paris‑based Iris Institute of International and Strategic Relations — describes the Israeli nuclear stance as complete deterrence. He points out that even during the Yom Kippur War in 1973, when Israel faced potential military collapse, they didn’t actually fire a nuclear shell.

    • In theory, the nuclear option remains X‑factor—available but never invoked.
    • In practice, its mere possibility adds an extra layer of pressure on adversaries.

    Bottom Line

    So, Israel’s nuclear policy is like a suspenseful loop: never full disclosure, always a strategic tease. Iran, on the other hand, pops up with a seemingly peaceful goal while keeping an eye on the nuclear playbook.

    In a region that’s more complex than a tangled string of earbuds, this “mystery game” keeps everyone on their toes—and keeps the bureaucrats frequently looking over their shoulders.

    FILE: Israeli air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, Thursday, June 19, 2025.FILE: Israeli air defense system fires to intercept missiles during an Iranian attack over Tel Aviv, Israel, Thursday, June 19, 2025.
    Leo Correa/Copyright 2025 The AP All rights reserved

    Pursuit of strategic ambiguity

    This is why, despite the deliberate strategic ambiguity, one thing is certain, Rigoulet-Roze told Euronews.
    “The Jewish state does not tolerate, up to the use of force, the existence of other nuclear powers in the region,” he said.
    In fact, in 1981, Israel attacked and destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor, which was officially intended for civil use and had been developed with the help of France under its then President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing and Prime Minister Jaques Chirac.
    Israeli security services justified the attack by saying that the reactor could potentially have been converted to plutonium production.
    In 2007, Israeli jets also struck around Der ez-Zor in Syria, where, according to Mossad, the al-Assad regime was building a nuclear reactor with the assistance of North Korea.
    Today, the balance of power and political-diplomatic relations have shifted in Israel’s favour: Egypt and Jordan have recognised the Jewish state, Syria is no longer in a position to do any harm after the fall of al-Assad, and Lebanon certainly poses no existential threat. What’s more, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq is now but a vague memory.

    Related

    Iran’s ayatollah claims ‘victory’ over Israel in first public appearance since ceasefire dealIran’s uranium stocks said to be intact, UK media citing European intelligence probe says

    However, the presence of an Iranian strategic nuclear force would break the balance of non-proliferation in a notoriously unstable region, analysts warn.
    “Saudi Prince Bin Salman has said that in the case of an Iranian nuclear force, Saudi Arabia would also pursue the military atom, and then there would be a potential domino effect with Turkey and Egypt feeling compelled to equip themselves with atomic weapons,” Rigoulet-Roze said.
    “This is what was intended to be avoided with the Iran nuclear deal signed in 2015 by the EU, the UK, Germany, France, the US, China and Russia, and denounced by President Trump in 2018,” he added.