Table of Contents
Russia’s Role in Iran-US-Israel Tensions.
As the US and Israel escalate strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, Russia navigates a delicate balance between supporting its ally Tehran and avoiding entanglement in a volatile conflict. Following the US-led Operation Midnight Hammer on June 21, 2025, targeting Iran’s Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan sites, Iranian leaders have urged Moscow for greater assistance. Russian President Vladimir Putin has offered mediation, condemned the attacks, and signaled readiness to help Iran, but emphasized neutrality due to Russia’s ties with Israel. With President Donald Trump hinting at regime change and Iran vowing retaliation, all eyes are on Russia’s next moves. Here’s a detailed look at the situation, Russia’s stance, and the broader implications.
Operation Midnight Hammer: A Game-Changing Escalation
US and Israeli Strikes
On June 21, 2025, the US launched Operation Midnight Hammer, deploying B-2 stealth bombers to strike three Iranian nuclear sites: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. President Trump hailed the operation as a “spectacular military success,” claiming the sites were “completely and totally obliterated.” However, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported only partial damage, with Fordow’s underground facility showing “very limited” impact. Israel, which initiated strikes on June 13, targeted six Iranian airports, destroying 15 aircraft, and killed 10 IRGC members in Yazd.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the US strikes as a betrayal of ongoing nuclear talks, asserting Iran’s right to self-defense. He warned of “everlasting consequences” and ruled out diplomacy until Iran retaliates. Iran has launched over 400 ballistic missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel, killing 24 people, while Israeli strikes have killed at least 400 in Iran.
Trump’s Regime Change Rhetoric
Trump’s suggestion of regime change in Iran—stating, “If the current Iranian regime is unable to make Iran great again, why wouldn’t there be a regime change?”—has heightened tensions. Despite his administration’s earlier push for nuclear talks, Trump’s comments align with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s aggressive stance, including not ruling out assassinating Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth clarified the strikes aimed to halt Iran’s nuclear program, not topple the regime, but Trump’s rhetoric suggests broader ambitions.
Russia’s Response: Mediation and Neutrality
Condemnation and Mediation Offers
Russia has strongly condemned the US and Israeli strikes. The Russian Foreign Ministry called the attacks a “gross violation of international law” and an attempt to sabotage US-Iran nuclear talks. Putin told Araghchi the aggression against Iran was “groundless” and offered to mediate a ceasefire, proposing Moscow could broker a deal allowing Iran a peaceful nuclear program while addressing Israel’s security concerns. However, Trump rejected this offer, saying, “Mediate your own. Let’s mediate Russia first.”
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov emphasized Russia’s readiness to assist Iran, stating, “Everything depends on what Iran needs.” He highlighted Russia’s mediation efforts as a “concrete” form of support and noted that Iran was a frequent topic in recent Putin-Trump talks. Araghchi thanked Putin for standing on “the right side of history” during a Moscow meeting on June 23, 2025.
Neutrality and Strategic Caution
Despite close ties with Iran, including a strategic partnership signed in 2024, Putin has maintained neutrality, citing Russia’s 2 million Russian-speaking residents in Israel and its Muslim population (15% of Russia’s total). At the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Putin rebuffed critics questioning Russia’s loyalty, emphasizing friendly relations with Islamic countries and Russia’s observer status in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
Analyst Hanna Notte noted Russia’s “fine balancing act” to appear helpful to the US while avoiding alienating Iran. Russia’s limited leverage, preoccupation with Ukraine, and fear of losing another ally after Syria’s Assad regime fell in 2024 drive this caution. Moscow warned that Khamenei’s assassination could trigger “extremist moods” in Iran, opening a “Pandora’s box” of global consequences.
Iran’s Dilemma: Retaliation or Restraint?
Tehran’s Call for Russian Support
Supreme Leader Khamenei, reportedly in a safehouse bunker, urged Putin to do more after the US strikes, rejecting Trump’s call for “unconditional surrender.” Iran’s parliament endorsed closing the Strait of Hormuz, a move that could spike oil prices and disrupt global trade. Araghchi’s refusal to resume diplomacy until retaliation suggests Iran may target US bases or conduct cyberattacks, though experts warn this risks a wider war.
Nuclear Program and Internal Pressures
The IAEA confirmed damage to centrifuge production facilities but no radiation leaks, and Iran’s near-bomb-grade uranium stockpile’s location remains unclear. Some experts, like Mark Fitzpatrick, predict Iran may abandon the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and pursue a nuclear weapon, leveraging its 400kg of 60% enriched uranium. However, public anger over civilian casualties and economic hardship could fuel unrest, complicating the regime’s response.
Global Reactions and Mediation Challenges
International Condemnation
The UN, EU, and several nations condemned the US strikes. UN Secretary-General António Guterres called them a “dangerous escalation,” while France, Britain, and Germany supported Israel’s security but urged restraint. China’s Xi Jinping expressed “deep concern” and offered mediation, opposing violations of sovereignty. Saudi Arabia and Oman voiced concern, while India’s Narendra Modi advocated dialogue.
Failed Diplomatic Efforts
European talks with Araghchi in Geneva on June 21 failed to secure a ceasefire, and US envoy Steve Witkoff’s absence signaled Washington’s disengagement. Russia’s mediation proposals, backed by China and Pakistan, face skepticism after Trump’s rejection. The UN Security Council’s emergency meeting on June 20 yielded no breakthroughs.
Russia’s Strategic Calculations
Benefits and Risks
Russia benefits from the conflict’s distraction from Ukraine and a 15% oil price surge, bolstering its war economy. However, a regime collapse in Iran could weaken Moscow’s influence, forcing it to compete with the US and others for sway over a new government. Putin’s mediation efforts aim to preserve Russia’s regional clout while avoiding military overextension.
Limits of Support
Russia’s condemnation of the strikes and diplomatic backing for Iran are significant, but military aid remains absent. Moscow’s strategic partnership with Tehran obliges cooperation but not direct intervention, and Putin’s neutrality reflects concern for Russian-Israeli ties and domestic Muslim sentiment. Peskov’s statement that support depends on Iran’s needs suggests Moscow will tailor its response to Tehran’s requests, likely prioritizing diplomacy over escalation.
What’s Next?
Iran’s Response
Iran faces a critical choice: retaliate against US or Israeli targets, risking a broader conflict, or pursue diplomacy to rebuild its nuclear program. Closing the Strait of Hormuz or striking US bases could trigger a severe US response, while inaction may undermine regime credibility. Araghchi’s Moscow visit signals reliance on Russian support, but Putin’s neutrality limits military backing.
Russia’s Role
Russia will likely continue mediation efforts through international bodies like the UN, while providing diplomatic and economic support to Iran. However, its leverage is constrained by US rejection of mediation and Russia’s Ukraine commitments. A Khamenei assassination could force Moscow to reassess, potentially deepening its involvement to prevent an anti-Russian regime in Tehran.
Trump’s Gamble
Trump’s strikes and regime change rhetoric risk entangling the US in a prolonged conflict, contradicting his anti-war campaign promises. Domestic dissent, with lawmakers like Thomas Massie and Tim Kaine opposing unauthorized strikes, could limit his options. Israel’s push for US bunker-buster bombs to hit Fordow suggests further escalation unless diplomacy prevails.
Global Stakes
The conflict threatens Middle East stability, global energy markets, and nuclear non-proliferation. A wider war could draw in Gulf states hosting US bases, like Bahrain and Kuwait, and disrupt oil flows. Russia’s mediation, if accepted, could de-escalate tensions, but Trump’s rejection and Iran’s retaliation plans dim prospects for peace.
Russia stands at a crossroads, offering mediation while maintaining neutrality in the Iran-US-Israel conflict. Putin’s condemnation of US strikes and readiness to help Iran reflect strategic support, but his caution underscores Russia’s limited leverage and competing interests. As Iran weighs retaliation and Trump pushes regime change, Moscow’s diplomatic efforts may shape the conflict’s trajectory—or be sidelined by escalating violence. The world awaits Iran’s next move and whether Russia can broker a path to de-escalation.
What do you think about Russia’s role in this crisis? Can Putin’s mediation succeed, or will Iran’s retaliation plunge the region into wider conflict?
