Follow us on social

Ali_khamenei_and_vladimir_putin

Suspicious bind: Iran’s relationship with Russia

Decision-makers in Tehran are developing the Iran-Russia relationship, but they seem careful not to fully turn away from the West.

Analysis | Middle East

Russia’s war on Ukraine and the potential restoration of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) have thrown a spotlight on the relationship between Tehran and Moscow. In the past decade, intensifying Western sanctions on Iran and the animosity between the country and the United States have prompted Tehran to pursue deeper political, economic, and security ties with Moscow. Russia shares Iran’s vision of a multipolar world order in which the US has a diminished role. This summer, there has been a high-level meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Russia has launched an Iranian satellite into orbit for the first time, and Iran has allegedly supplied Russia with drones that it could use in Ukraine. These developments have reignited the debate in Tehran about how far it should tilt towards Moscow, especially given that the West would ease its sanctions on Iran under a restored JCPOA.

Iran and Russia often treat each other as partners of convenience when things get tough with the West. The Putin-Khamenei meeting – which took place in July on the sidelines of a summit in Tehran – was significant for the relationship between the two countries, but it was also timed to send a signal to external players rather than to forge an even deeper alliance between Russia and Iran. Putin’s visit to Iran was his first trip to a country other than a former Soviet state since he launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It proved useful to Tehran at a time when Iran was under growing Western pressure to commit to restoring the JCPOA. By hosting the summit in Tehran and signing major energy agreements with Russia, Iran signalled that it had other options and that it was not desperate for a deal with the West.

Some US media outlets allege that Iran has started supplying drones to Russia for use in Ukraine and that the Iranian satellite Russia launched last month will be involved in intelligence gathering in Ukraine. So far, the Iranian government has denied such reports. There is no evidence that Iran plans to become involved in Russia’s war on Ukraine. In two speeches since February, Khamenei has carefully distanced Iran from the conflict – even if, in a mild shift from his neutral remarks that the war in Ukraine should end, he supported Russia by calling the invasion “preemptive”.

Hardline Iranian media outlets such as Kayhan and Javan interpreted Khamenei’s message as meaning that Iran should support Russia in Ukraine. But Nasser Kanani, spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, clarified Khamenei’s remarks by underscoring that Iran’s stance on Ukraine has not changed.

In fact, many Iranian leaders remain deeply suspicious of Russia – a sentiment rooted in a history of betrayal. Against this backdrop, Iran’s political elites divide into two main groups in their views of Russia. One group favours strong ties with Russia as expedient to the survival of the Iranian regime and as a counterbalance to the US military presence near Iran’s borders. The Trump administration’s 2018 decision to withdraw the US from the nuclear deal and its policy of maximum pressure on Iran increased support for those advocating an alliance with Russia. This group includes Khamenei, his confidants such as foreign policy adviser Ali-Akbar Velayati and Majlis Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, top commanders in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), clerics who lead Friday prayers, and executives at conglomerates with close ties to the state. They share the Kremlin’s concerns about the threat from the West (including NATO expansion) and seek stronger bilateral cooperation to shield Iran from Western sanctions and military strikes.

The second group, known as the ‘pragmatists’, comprises moderate and conservative politicians who see Russia as an important neighbour but reject efforts to strengthen strategic ties with the country. They believe that it is valuable for Iran to keep its options open with the West and to avoid excessive dependence on Moscow. The members of this group include former foreign minister Javad Zarif, former president Hassan Rouhani, and Ali Shamkhani, who currently serves as secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. All three call for de-escalation with the West. Moderate former IRGC commander Hossein Alaei, another member of the group, has vigorously challenged Russia’s attitude towards Iran in not only the war in Syria but also the energy sector, UN Security Council votes, and arms deals. In April 2021, Zarif criticised Moscow for stonewalling in nuclear talks with Tehran in 2014 and 2015, attempting to sabotage the JCPOA, and exploiting Iranian land forces in Syria. In March 2022, when Iran and the US seemed to be on the verge of finalising a plan to restore the JCPOA, the Kremlin disrupted the process by suggesting that Ukraine-linked Western sanctions on Russia would damage the prospects of achieving this. Shamkhani implicitly expressed dismay with Moscow by saying that “40 years of experience has taught our people that relying on Western or Eastern powers will neither guarantee our rights nor our security.”

Given their distrust of both Russia and the West, Iranian decision-makers have long viewed their country as a lonely strategic actor. They have advocated a balanced foreign policy strategy that maintains links to all sides. Some moderate and even conservative media and political figures have now voiced their discontent with Tehran’s apparent effort to abandon its neutrality in the Ukraine war.

Like the Rouhani government, President Ebrahim Raisi’s administration has developed its relationship with the Kremlin while keeping the door open to the West, particularly Europe. Indeed, Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian recently dismissed the idea that Iran’s fate is bound up with Russia’s, commenting that “Europe will have a place in the government’s balanced foreign policy approach … We must pick the best in both the West and the East.”

Indeed, the war in Ukraine has created new opportunities for Iran to advance its interests with both Russia and the West. Iran’s attempts to develop its military partnerships with Moscow have allowed it to display its defence and aerospace technology – as one can see in the drone deal. Iran has also used the rift between Russia and the West to try to erode what it sees as US hegemony in the Middle East. Meanwhile, rising global energy costs have made Iran more valuable to both Europe and Russia. Officials in Tehran have openly stated that they could reintroduce Iranian oil into international markets – and thereby reduce energy prices in Europe – in return for the removal of some US sanctions on Iran. Tehran is contemplating gas exports to Europe in the long term (although this would require careful coordination with Moscow).

Before Western states intensified their sanctions on Russia, an increase in Iranian oil and gas exports would have heightened competition between Iran and Russia. But Tehran could now provide solutions to Moscow. They have floated ideas about how Russia could benefit from Iran’s re-entry into international energy markets after a restoration of the JCPOA. Iran could either import Russian oil and gas to serve its domestic needs (allowing it to export more Iranian oil) or re-export Russian products to non-European buyers on Moscow’s behalf. Following Putin’s visit to Iran in July, the two countries reportedly accelerated their technical discussions on such arrangements. However, it remains unclear whether Iran is willing to go down this road, given that doing so could expose it to greater US and European pressure – a dangerous gamble at a time when the government in Tehran has expended a huge amount of political capital to restore the JCPOA.

One should not underestimate the extent to which decision-makers in Tehran are developing the Iran-Russia relationship. But they seem to be carefully calibrating any move that involves Moscow to avoid angering elites at home or limiting their options with the West – despite Iran’s tense relationship with the US and their disappointment with Europe’s inability to provide economic relief under the original JCPOA. They will likely continue advancing relations with Russia while pursuing political and economic engagement with the West. Russia’s war on Ukraine and the potential restoration of the JCPOA give Iran greater room to implement a balanced foreign policy.

This article has been republished with permission from the European Council on Foreign Relations.


Russian President Vladimir Putin meets with Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. (CC BY 4.0)
Analysis | Middle East
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.