To learn more about the details, Mehr news agency's correspondent has conducted an interview with Dr. Leonid Savin Editor-in-Chief and Managing Director of Katehon, an influential Russian Think Tank.
Let’s review the interview in questions and answers.
Q: Given Russia’s conduct since the outbreak of the US-Israeli war against Iran, how would you assess Moscow’s approach and actions in the political, diplomatic, military, and intelligence spheres? To what extent have these actions been consistent with Tehran’s expectations of a strategic partner?
A: First of all, Russia and Iran signed new special agreement some time ago that bring our partnership into new level of cooperation. On diplomatic international level Russia supports Iran for different spheres of activity – from rejection of foreign interference and imposed sanctions to justification of nuclear program of Iran (and Russia is involved into construction process of Busher plant). Military and intelligence coordination is not open for public. We know about some supplies of Russian technics and equipment like aircrafts and helicopters. And before Iran provided to Russia drone technologies (“Sheheed” model that in Russia got name “Geran” and then developed for reactive strike drone). Western media also blame Russia for providing to Iran data intelligence, cause of space surveillance available for Russian military. But real scale of military/intelligence cooperation is unknown cause of sensitive information and secret issues. Counter-terrorism interaction also was always on high level and this activity
Personally, I think that both countries can and need to do more to enlarge bilateral partnership. To organize defense pact, at least for Caspian region
Q: Some argue that Russia has acted cautiously in response to the war against Iran. Is this caution primarily driven by Russia’s involvement in the war in Ukraine and its concerns about a direct confrontation with the United States, or does Moscow fundamentally seek to avoid becoming involved in a war that could put its own interests at risk?
A: We understand very well, that the collective West interested to destroy Russia by any means. The same strategy used against Iran. China also seems for the West like potential adversary and before there were many attempts to bring domestic problems for the China through different tools of manipulations. Also, Ukrainian conflict by fact is proxy war against Russia led by the West. The most significant role in support of Kiev’s regime and against Russia played by leaders of the UK, USA, France and Germany. BBC team organized fake report about Bucha in 2022 when Russian troops was withdrawal. In general, political elites of the West always tried to deceive Russian leadership and there no any trust anymore.
Also, we understand risk of escalation till nuclear war. And would like to avoid it. But if the West and his proxies will do more provocations against Russia (and they do it in regular way) Moscow will need to do response. From this point of view Russian interests mostly focused on keeping unity and secure periphery as well as technological development and achievement of the full independence (autarky). Of course, another important strategic line is army reorganization to be more effective and use of advanced weapon systems. Defense ministry and corporations linked with military industrial production now care about it. Ukrainian conflict was and still experience for Russian military and security services.
Q: With Trump’s return to office, there was widespread speculation in the media that Russia and Ukraine were moving closer to a ceasefire agreement, but such an agreement ultimately failed to materialize. In your view, what were the main obstacles to a ceasefire between the two sides? Was the dispute over territory and security guarantees the primary issue, or does the disagreement run deeper, involving fundamentally different views about the future of European security and Russia’s relationship with the West?
A: It never was closer. Russia ready to sign peace agreement but only on conditions proposed before – denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine, respect of Russian geopolitical interests and organization of clear security frame. Ukraine cannot be member of NATO. Russian people in Ukraine must be respected and their right respected. As well as about Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Crimea and regions of ex-Ukraine where people voted to be with Russia as its part will stay in Russia and will never return to Ukraine. Actually, from European point of view, it is not violation cause after 1999 when part of Serbia (Kosovo) proclaimed self-independence, it was supported by NATO and the West. So, what we see in Ukraine now is just continuation of the policy once used by the West.
Concerning Russian view on future we are more interested to develop active relationship with Global South. There was term like “Turn to the East”, but really to the South too. And Iran is also part of it.
Q: In light of the war in Ukraine, the US-Israeli war against Iran, and increasing US pressure on China, does Moscow view these developments as separate crises, or does it see them as part of a broader strategic competition between the United States and non-Western powers, as well as an effort to reshape the existing international order?
A: Of course, it is strategic competition effected by emergence of the multipolar world order. West led by the US just would like to keep own hegemony (military, political, economic and also moral). We are wanting more justice international system. This is the reason. If you see on historical perspectives there were the same disturbance during transition from one type of order to another. But now multipolar moment is unique cause the West losing his dominance like never before.
Q: How would you assess Iran’s response and resistance to the US and Israeli attacks? In your view, to what extent has Iran been able to maintain the initiative, withstand military pressure, and influence the calculations of its adversaries during this confrontation?
A: It is very appreciated and Russian public applause to Iran, especially to decision makers for this response. It was very strong and at the same time very smart. To block Hormuz strait was geopolitical nightmare for the US and its allies in region. Both the US and Israel understood own misfortune over Iran. Despite own victims resulted by illegal and criminal strikes of the US and Israel Iran and its people stands firm.
Q: Could the war against Iran become a turning point in the security order of the Middle East? If so, what role does Russia envision for itself in the emerging regional order, and how might Moscow’s relations with Iran, China, and the United States change in the aftermath of the war?
A: For my opinion it is already changed security environment of the region. And neighbor countries already reacted on this change, I mean Mecca pact between Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Iran also projected new lines of control and interests near own borders. We can add allies of Iran in Yemen, but also in Iraq, Lebanon and other countries. Zionists would like to eliminate them all and it is the reason of genocide in Palestine and bombing Lebanon, but in practice it is not possible. Like decades before resistance will be revived because of the mentality and strategic culture.
If speak about relations of great powers there is clear that Russia and China will continue to strengthen cooperation. But the US will have more problems in future. Geopolitical influence of the US in the Middle East will decline. Many partners inside NATO not trust to the Washington anymore. There also tensions because Israeli lobby and part of politicians inside the US not welcome this trend. Let’s see what happens after November elections in the Congress. There are many signs that against Trump growing antipathy in camp of Republicans and Democrats also not happy with his policy.
Realistically there still will be tensions and conflict. To achieve multipolarity we need to create effective structure. Why it is important? Because unipolar world still has it – World bank and IMF in economy, NATO in military, G7 politically. So, Russia, China, Iran, other members of BRICS need to create counter balance, effective and complete.
MNA
Your Comment