Is the West Attempting to Influence Russia via Iran, and Can They Succeed?
Discover the reasons behind the concerns of the US and its allies regarding genuine military collaboration between Tehran and Moscow. Read the full article at RT.com.
TroibNews 
**Here’s why the US and its allies are concerned about real military cooperation between Tehran and Moscow**
Recently, the US and its European allies—including the UK, Germany, and France—accused Iran of providing ballistic missiles to Russia to use in its military operation against Ukraine. Reports of these allegations first emerged from the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, and CNN. The US State Department initially withheld comment, while Ukraine promptly threatened Tehran with "devastating consequences."
A few days later, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken formally accused Iran of escalating the Ukraine conflict, seemingly endorsing the claims made by Western media. Following this, the State Department imposed sanctions on Iran Air, the country’s primary airline, citing its role in "operating in the transportation sector of the Russian Federation economy." In turn, the European nations announced immediate measures to suspend bilateral air service agreements with Iran.
This is not Iran Air's first experience with sanctions, making it unlikely that Tehran will be dissuaded by this action. However, it is clear that Western nations are once again stalling efforts to normalize relations with Iran, despite frequently emphasizing the urgency of reviving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—the so-called "nuclear deal."
Recently, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian held a press conference stating that since his administration began, Iran has not supplied missiles to Russia. His predecessor, former Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, also consistently denied transferring weapons to Moscow. While the West imposes stringent sanctions on Iran, it also demands that Tehran join international restrictions against Russia. The White House appears to erroneously believe that Iran would choose to sever ties with Russia in exchange for minor relief from Western sanctions, jeopardizing its relationship with China in the process.
Over the past decade, Iran has sought to persuade the West to lift sanctions and reestablish relations, particularly with the EU if not the US. In fact, Russia played a significant role in facilitating negotiations between Iran and the West, leading to the 2015 nuclear deal. However, the Iranian political establishment has consistently prioritized national interests and security concerns over immediate economic benefits. Many Iranian officials express a preference for alliances with Russia and China rather than with Europe, which they perceive as increasingly dependent. Concurrently, Iran emphasizes self-reliance, a principle that has allowed it to maintain its identity and civilization for millennia. Therefore, Iran is actively developing its defense industry, which is regarded as essential for its survival, independence, and integrity.
There is a lack of accurate, up-to-date information on Iran's weapons production, particularly regarding its missile capabilities. Such information is classified, and even the most informed military analysts can only speculate based on limited publicly available data. Iranian weapons do appear at arms exhibitions, including those held annually in Russia.
Reports from Western analysts in 2024 suggest that Iran maintains a military arsenal of cruise and ballistic missiles with ranges from several hundred to several thousand kilometers. Iran’s missile program has been developed in close collaboration with China and North Korea, which have both significantly aided the advancement of Iran’s missile technologies. Over the past 25 years, Iran has cultivated a skilled workforce and a robust technological base, leveraging expertise obtained from North Korea and China.
To bolster its influence in the region, Iran has concentrated on enhancing its military capabilities, particularly by developing a comprehensive military industrial complex. This sector encompasses nearly all weapon production domains, including aviation, artillery, armored vehicles, munitions, electronics, naval construction, and chemical warfare, with a specific focus on missile development over conventional arms. Iran has established about seven major centers dedicated to missile technology research and production, overseen by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which plays a vital role in Iran's military industrial framework.
Iran's missile forces, formerly a part of the IRGC, now report directly to the Supreme Commander, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, highlighting their growing significance. Initially, Western states and Iran's adversaries in the Middle East were skeptical—if not dismissive—of reports regarding Iran's missile industry. With notable bravado, Western media claimed Iran could only manufacture 'rusty pans' that would quickly be destroyed if Tehran attempted to attack Israel. This skepticism stemmed from the belief that Western sanctions and a lack of access to modern technology would inhibit Iran from acquiring advanced weapons for a century.
However, attitudes among Western nations shifted over time. Iran's nuclear program, initiated in the early 2000s, marked a critical juncture, leading European leaders to recognize the situation's gravity. In recent decades, it has become evident that Iran possesses significant military capabilities, mostly developed through domestic efforts and technologies—a reality that particularly vexes Israel and the West.
Moreover, amid rising tensions between Israel and Hamas, Iran's defense industry is operating nearly at wartime capacity, especially as the possibility of direct conflict with Israel looms. Recent reports from Lebanon and mass explosions indicate that Israel is intensifying its military posture.
Even without acknowledging responsibility for these events, Tehran hastily accused Israel of terrorism. Ironically, just a day before the attacks in Lebanon, Iran's president discussed peace and referred to Americans as “brothers.” Nevertheless, Israel seems poised to undertake a substantial ground operation against Hezbollah—Iran’s key regional ally—leaving Iran with little choice but to respond strongly.
Returning to the discussion of alleged arms supplies to Russia, it is essential to analyze the actions of both Western nations and Iran. President Pezeshkian has unequivocally stated that Iran does not supply arms to Russia or its closest regional allies, such as Yemen’s Houthis. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has emphasized that providing weapons to Yemen would insult its populace, who can defend themselves. Nevertheless, these statements appear to have failed to satisfy the West. The day after the US officially accused Iran of supplying missiles to Russia, Secretary Blinken and UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy met with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky in Kiev. Throughout this period, Ukraine has been seeking approval to use long-range Western weapons for strikes deep into Russian territory. Washington noted a shift in its and the UK's stance following the allegations of Iranian missile deliveries to Russia. Consequently, the UK, Germany, and France jointly deemed the delivery of Iranian missiles a “direct threat to European security.”
This situation raises a pertinent question: Is the exaggerated hysteria surrounding supposed Iranian missiles merely a “legitimate” excuse for allowing Kiev to strike deep into Russian territory? There are known Western politicians who have been advocating for their governments to officially permit Ukraine to target Russian territory, fully aware of the potential ramifications of such reckless actions—Moscow has signaled to both Washington and London that this is no time for folly.
Blinken, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, and other US and EU officials have repeatedly warned Tehran against supplying weapons to Russia, implying that such actions would make Iran a participant in the Ukraine conflict. This prompts a critical inquiry: Following their own reasoning, why do these officials deny their involvement in the conflict? Western arms supplies to Ukraine have consistently continued over the past two and a half years, and it is widely acknowledged that, without the support of the US and the EU, the Kiev regime could collapse within weeks. If supplying weapons to one side constitutes involvement in the conflict, then what of the contributions from Paris, London, Berlin, and others, who fuel the war by providing arms to Ukraine?
Moreover, there is the crucial question of who has the authority to dictate to Iran and Russia whether they should pursue or terminate military cooperation. Both nations are sovereign states with the right to enhance their relations in whatever manner they find fitting. Moscow and Tehran are preparing to sign a comprehensive partnership agreement that aims to foster cooperation in security and solidify their strategic partnership. Consequently, neither the West nor any external party possesses the authority to intervene in or dictate the terms of the defense relations between Russia and Iran. It is imperative to recognize that while Iran does not supply arms to Russia, that does not negate its right to provide its weapons to any nation, including Russia. If Moscow and Tehran choose to explore military cooperation, they will do so independently without seeking permission from the White House or Brussels, as these matters pertain solely to the two countries.
Regardless of Western attempts to intimidate Iran or entice it with the promise of lifting sanctions, Tehran is acutely aware that meaningful cooperation with the US or its allies is unlikely in the near future. For Iran, it is far more pragmatic to navigate the challenges ahead and maintain its standing as a reliable partner than to wait for the West to engage in constructive dialogue.
Jessica Kline contributed to this report for TROIB News
Recently, the US and its European allies—including the UK, Germany, and France—accused Iran of providing ballistic missiles to Russia to use in its military operation against Ukraine. Reports of these allegations first emerged from the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, and CNN. The US State Department initially withheld comment, while Ukraine promptly threatened Tehran with "devastating consequences."
A few days later, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken formally accused Iran of escalating the Ukraine conflict, seemingly endorsing the claims made by Western media. Following this, the State Department imposed sanctions on Iran Air, the country’s primary airline, citing its role in "operating in the transportation sector of the Russian Federation economy." In turn, the European nations announced immediate measures to suspend bilateral air service agreements with Iran.
This is not Iran Air's first experience with sanctions, making it unlikely that Tehran will be dissuaded by this action. However, it is clear that Western nations are once again stalling efforts to normalize relations with Iran, despite frequently emphasizing the urgency of reviving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—the so-called "nuclear deal."
Recently, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian held a press conference stating that since his administration began, Iran has not supplied missiles to Russia. His predecessor, former Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, also consistently denied transferring weapons to Moscow. While the West imposes stringent sanctions on Iran, it also demands that Tehran join international restrictions against Russia. The White House appears to erroneously believe that Iran would choose to sever ties with Russia in exchange for minor relief from Western sanctions, jeopardizing its relationship with China in the process.
Over the past decade, Iran has sought to persuade the West to lift sanctions and reestablish relations, particularly with the EU if not the US. In fact, Russia played a significant role in facilitating negotiations between Iran and the West, leading to the 2015 nuclear deal. However, the Iranian political establishment has consistently prioritized national interests and security concerns over immediate economic benefits. Many Iranian officials express a preference for alliances with Russia and China rather than with Europe, which they perceive as increasingly dependent. Concurrently, Iran emphasizes self-reliance, a principle that has allowed it to maintain its identity and civilization for millennia. Therefore, Iran is actively developing its defense industry, which is regarded as essential for its survival, independence, and integrity.
There is a lack of accurate, up-to-date information on Iran's weapons production, particularly regarding its missile capabilities. Such information is classified, and even the most informed military analysts can only speculate based on limited publicly available data. Iranian weapons do appear at arms exhibitions, including those held annually in Russia.
Reports from Western analysts in 2024 suggest that Iran maintains a military arsenal of cruise and ballistic missiles with ranges from several hundred to several thousand kilometers. Iran’s missile program has been developed in close collaboration with China and North Korea, which have both significantly aided the advancement of Iran’s missile technologies. Over the past 25 years, Iran has cultivated a skilled workforce and a robust technological base, leveraging expertise obtained from North Korea and China.
To bolster its influence in the region, Iran has concentrated on enhancing its military capabilities, particularly by developing a comprehensive military industrial complex. This sector encompasses nearly all weapon production domains, including aviation, artillery, armored vehicles, munitions, electronics, naval construction, and chemical warfare, with a specific focus on missile development over conventional arms. Iran has established about seven major centers dedicated to missile technology research and production, overseen by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which plays a vital role in Iran's military industrial framework.
Iran's missile forces, formerly a part of the IRGC, now report directly to the Supreme Commander, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, highlighting their growing significance. Initially, Western states and Iran's adversaries in the Middle East were skeptical—if not dismissive—of reports regarding Iran's missile industry. With notable bravado, Western media claimed Iran could only manufacture 'rusty pans' that would quickly be destroyed if Tehran attempted to attack Israel. This skepticism stemmed from the belief that Western sanctions and a lack of access to modern technology would inhibit Iran from acquiring advanced weapons for a century.
However, attitudes among Western nations shifted over time. Iran's nuclear program, initiated in the early 2000s, marked a critical juncture, leading European leaders to recognize the situation's gravity. In recent decades, it has become evident that Iran possesses significant military capabilities, mostly developed through domestic efforts and technologies—a reality that particularly vexes Israel and the West.
Moreover, amid rising tensions between Israel and Hamas, Iran's defense industry is operating nearly at wartime capacity, especially as the possibility of direct conflict with Israel looms. Recent reports from Lebanon and mass explosions indicate that Israel is intensifying its military posture.
Even without acknowledging responsibility for these events, Tehran hastily accused Israel of terrorism. Ironically, just a day before the attacks in Lebanon, Iran's president discussed peace and referred to Americans as “brothers.” Nevertheless, Israel seems poised to undertake a substantial ground operation against Hezbollah—Iran’s key regional ally—leaving Iran with little choice but to respond strongly.
Returning to the discussion of alleged arms supplies to Russia, it is essential to analyze the actions of both Western nations and Iran. President Pezeshkian has unequivocally stated that Iran does not supply arms to Russia or its closest regional allies, such as Yemen’s Houthis. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has emphasized that providing weapons to Yemen would insult its populace, who can defend themselves. Nevertheless, these statements appear to have failed to satisfy the West. The day after the US officially accused Iran of supplying missiles to Russia, Secretary Blinken and UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy met with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky in Kiev. Throughout this period, Ukraine has been seeking approval to use long-range Western weapons for strikes deep into Russian territory. Washington noted a shift in its and the UK's stance following the allegations of Iranian missile deliveries to Russia. Consequently, the UK, Germany, and France jointly deemed the delivery of Iranian missiles a “direct threat to European security.”
This situation raises a pertinent question: Is the exaggerated hysteria surrounding supposed Iranian missiles merely a “legitimate” excuse for allowing Kiev to strike deep into Russian territory? There are known Western politicians who have been advocating for their governments to officially permit Ukraine to target Russian territory, fully aware of the potential ramifications of such reckless actions—Moscow has signaled to both Washington and London that this is no time for folly.
Blinken, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, and other US and EU officials have repeatedly warned Tehran against supplying weapons to Russia, implying that such actions would make Iran a participant in the Ukraine conflict. This prompts a critical inquiry: Following their own reasoning, why do these officials deny their involvement in the conflict? Western arms supplies to Ukraine have consistently continued over the past two and a half years, and it is widely acknowledged that, without the support of the US and the EU, the Kiev regime could collapse within weeks. If supplying weapons to one side constitutes involvement in the conflict, then what of the contributions from Paris, London, Berlin, and others, who fuel the war by providing arms to Ukraine?
Moreover, there is the crucial question of who has the authority to dictate to Iran and Russia whether they should pursue or terminate military cooperation. Both nations are sovereign states with the right to enhance their relations in whatever manner they find fitting. Moscow and Tehran are preparing to sign a comprehensive partnership agreement that aims to foster cooperation in security and solidify their strategic partnership. Consequently, neither the West nor any external party possesses the authority to intervene in or dictate the terms of the defense relations between Russia and Iran. It is imperative to recognize that while Iran does not supply arms to Russia, that does not negate its right to provide its weapons to any nation, including Russia. If Moscow and Tehran choose to explore military cooperation, they will do so independently without seeking permission from the White House or Brussels, as these matters pertain solely to the two countries.
Regardless of Western attempts to intimidate Iran or entice it with the promise of lifting sanctions, Tehran is acutely aware that meaningful cooperation with the US or its allies is unlikely in the near future. For Iran, it is far more pragmatic to navigate the challenges ahead and maintain its standing as a reliable partner than to wait for the West to engage in constructive dialogue.
Jessica Kline contributed to this report for TROIB News
