Follow us on social

Interpreting the 20-year military pact between Russia & Iran

Interpreting the 20-year military pact between Russia & Iran

Not just a strategic agreement, they want to send a message that together, the two can end-run pariah status in the West

Middle East

On January 17, Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Iranian counterpart Masoud Pezeshkian signed an historic 20-year strategic agreement that a Reuters report later said “is likely to worry the West.”

In it, the two countries agreed to boost cooperation in security services, military drills, port visits and joint officer training. They pledged not to allow their territory to be used in any military action against the other, or help anyone to attack the other, and would cooperate to counter outside military threats.

Initially, there was speculation that the pact would be approved during the BRICS summit in Russia in October, but Moscow quickly dispelled those rumors at the time. It is likely that Russia chose not to sign the agreement in October given Moscow’s efforts to make the summit inclusive to the Global South.

Thus the optics surrounding a bilateral trade and security partnership would have undermined the main objectives of the summit. Specifically, those objectives (also fundamental underpinnings of the newly signed partnership) focused on discrediting Western claims of Russian isolation and showing that BRICS continues to gain support, particularly, from a geoeconomic perspective, that the bloc can counter sanctions imposed by the West through various means.

The latter includes the development of new payment systems that would allow countries to trade in their national currencies.

Furthermore, the carefully cultivated message of BRICS unity would have been damaged if the announcement had blind-sided such important attendees such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, not known to be the strongest supporters of the regime in Tehran.

However, less than two months later, Turkey’s involvement in the overthrow of the Moscow/Tehran-supported Assad government and its subsequent power play in Syria hastened the formal signing of the agreement.

Syria was clearly a key topic for both Putin and Pezeshkian. When discussing recent developments in Syria, they each emphasized their commitment “to a comprehensive settlement in that country based on respect for its sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity,” according to the Kremlin’s readout of the conversation.

Furthermore, Syria and the immediate region are of significant importance as expressed in the language of the partnership. For example, in Article 12, both sides agreed to enhance Russian-Iranian security cooperation “in Central Asia, the South Caucasus and the Middle East with the goal to prevent interference … and destabilization by third parties [states].” This includes mutual agreement to ignore future Western sanctions on the two countries.

During the press conference after the signing, Putin underscored that ensuring peace and stability in this region (often described as West Asia) “serves the interests of both our nations.” West Asia is not only important to the two countries in a security context but also in terms of regional trade and economic cooperation and development.

“Promising opportunities … opening up in connection with the international North-South transport corridor,” Putin said during remarks after the signing. “Discussions are ongoing regarding the construction of its Rasht-Astara railway section. Implementing this project would help establish (a) seamless supply chain from Russia and Belarus to Iranian ports in the Gulf.”

Further development of such increased supply chain opportunities serves not only Russia and Iran but also sends an important signal to key partner China in support of its Belt and Road Initiative. It is also a message to BRICS and potential BRICS members seeking more trade and economic development opportunities in the region.

The joint press conference also included the announcement that the two sides are close to finalizing a 2 billion cubic meter per year deal to send Russian gas to Iran, potentially growing to 55 Bcm/yr. The two countries likely value closer energy ties amid growing tensions with the West and the risk of tougher energy sanctions policy from the incoming Trump administration.

The project also demonstrates Russia’s commitment to developing new partnerships and energy routes after Ukraine stopped Russian gas supplies. Russian gas has stopped flowing to EU states via Ukraine after a five-year deal expired in December, marking the end of a decades-long arrangement.

Russia and Iran are now significant partners in trade, finance, and investment, and their collaboration in these areas is steadily growing. Putin claimed that “over the first ten months of 2024, bilateral trade grew by 15.5 percent.”

“Our countries have almost completely transitioned to using national currencies in mutual settlements,” Putin asserted. “Efforts are being made to establish sustainable lending and banking interaction channels and to align national payment systems. In 2024, transactions conducted in Russian rubles and Iranian rials accounted for over 95 percent of bilateral trade.”

Given that the deal’s signing took place three days before President Trump’s inauguration, this statement could quite possibly be a shot directed at Trump himself, who recently threatened 100 percent tariffs on countries that seek to undermine the dollar or use other currencies during bilateral trade transactions.

The partnership comes at a time when Moscow and Tehran’s influence in the region has been diminished due to developments in Syria and the Middle East. For example, in responding to a question regarding Assad’s fall, Trump wrote in December on social media platform Truth Social that “Russia and Iran are in a weakened state right now, one because of Ukraine and a bad economy, the other because of Israel and its fighting success.”

Since the start of the war in Ukraine, Moscow has aggressively cultivated closer ties with Iran and other nations considered hostile towards the U.S. to counter assertions of its weakness and loss of influence. For example, it already has strategic pacts with North Korea and close ally Belarus, as well as a partnership agreement with China.

Whether these strategic pacts will serve as a deterrent to future conflict, whether military or economic, with the United States or its allies, remains to be seen.

Greater restraint will be required but made more difficult as the West finds itself increasingly divided regarding the future of its own security and economic institutions due to declining commonality between Washington and Brussels.

As such, these pacts could undermine Trump administration efforts at peace by exacerbating assertions from hardline factions in the West.


Top photo credit: Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian attend a ceremony to sign an agreement of comprehensive strategic partnership between the two countries, at the Kremlin in Moscow, Russia January 17, 2025. Sputnik/Vyacheslav Prokofyev/Pool via REUTERS
Middle East
Warfare movie A24
Top photo credit: (official trailer for Warfare/A24)
'Warfare': Rare Iraq film that doesn't preach but packs truth

'Warfare': Rare Iraq War film that doesn't preach but packs punch

Media

Unlike Alex Garland’s Civil War, his Warfare, co-directed with war vet Ray Mendoza, is not just another attempt at a realistic portrayal of war, in all its blood and gore. Warfare, based on a true story, is really a parable about the overweening ambition and crushing failure of empire, a microcosm of America’s disastrous adventure in Iraq.

A Navy Seal mission reconnoiters a neighborhood in Ramadi. “I like this house,” says the team commander, reflecting the overconfidence of the empire at its unipolar moment. But it soon becomes clear that the mission has underestimated the enemy, that the whole neighborhood has, in fact, been tracking the Seals’ movements. Surprised and scared, the mission requests to be extricated. But extrication becomes a bloody, hellish experience despite the Seals’ technological edge in weapons, IT, and logistics, and it barely succeeds.

keep readingShow less
vietnam war memorial washington DC
Top photo credit: Washington, DC, May 24, 2024: A visitor reads the names of the fallen soldiers at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial at the National Mall ahead of Memorial Day. (A_Kiphayet/Shutterstock)

Veterans: What we would say to Trump on this Memorial Day

Military Industrial Complex

This Memorial Day comes a month after the 50th anniversary of the Fall of Saigon, which was largely used to recall the collapse of the entire American project in Vietnam. In short, the failure of the war is now viewed as both a rebuke of the American Exceptionalism myth and the rigid Cold War mentality that had Washington in a vice grip for much of the 20th Century.

“The leaders who mismanaged this debacle were never held accountable and remained leading players in the establishment for the rest of their lives,” noted author and professor Stephen Walt in a RS symposium on the war. “The country learned little from this bitter experience, and repeated these same errors in Iraq, Afghanistan, and several other places.”

keep readingShow less
Ukraine war
Top image credit: HC FOTOSTUDIO via shutterstock.com

Should a Russia-Ukraine peace leave territorial control for later?

Europe

Since the beginning of President Donald Trump’s second term, there have been ongoing diplomatic efforts to broker a peace settlement in the three-year-long war between Russia and Ukraine. So far, however, negotiations have failed to bridge the stark divide between the two sides.

Two of the key contentious issues have been post-war security guarantees for Ukraine and the political status of Ukrainian territory claimed or annexed by Russia. Specifically, regarding territorial sovereignty, Ukraine and Russia have rejected the United States' proposal to “freeze” the war along the current line of conflict as a de facto new border. Ukraine has refused to renounce its claims of sovereignty over territories occupied by Russia (including Crimea, which was annexed in 2014). Russia, in turn, has demanded Ukraine’s recognition of Russia’s territorial claim over the entirety of the four Ukrainian regions, which Russia annexed in 2022.

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.