NICHOLAS SHUBITZ: Why Russia should play peacemaker between the US and Iran

The rapprochement between the US and Russia, amid reports that Washington has asked Moscow to mediate negotiations with Iran, could be a positive development for nuclear nonproliferation and enhanced security in the Middle East. However, several factors make the success of such a project an uncertain prospect. 

According to Bloomberg, Russian President Vladimir Putin has agreed to mediate talks between the US and Iran, after being asked to do so during a telephone call with US President Donald Trump. This request was apparently reiterated in discussions between US secretary of state Marco Rubio and Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov at their recent meeting in Saudi Arabia. 

The logic behind Trump’s approach is clear. Despite his administration’s historically hardline stance on Iran, engaging in a direct confrontation is not a strategic priority for the US. Commenting on these developments, the Israeli media has suggested that for the Trump administration, reducing tensions with Iran would be considered a diplomatic victory, allowing the US to focus on China and domestic issues rather than Middle East entanglements.   

Washington cannot afford to completely ignore the Iranian situation. After the fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, Iran has found itself in a precarious position. Other regional allies such as Hezbollah and Hamas have also been degraded by their conflict with Israel, and Tehran may choose to develop nuclear capabilities as a defensive measure against further escalation.

There is a rare diplomatic window for a peaceful resolution. Iran’s newly elected president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has typically expressed a willingness to engage in dialogue and Iran’s ongoing economic struggles under harsh sanctions may create political conditions that lend support to a deal being reached.   

Due to the hostile rhetoric between Washington and Tehran, there are no direct communication channels between the two nations. This is where Russia comes in. Having maintained tense but long-standing diplomatic relations with both parties, Moscow is in a unique position to facilitate negotiations.

Though the Kremlin has neither confirmed nor denied the US request, Putin has consistently emphasised the importance of resolving Iran’s nuclear issue through peaceful means. Putin’s spokesperson reaffirmed Russia’s commitment to facilitating dialogue, stating that Moscow was willing to do everything possible to assist in this process. 

Recognising that multiple intermediaries would complicate the situation, the US seems to feel that Russia is well positioned to act as the intermediary. The US is likely to view Russia as a nation Iran can trust, while also calculating that the prospect of better ties with Washington could act as a strong incentive for Moscow to encourage Iran to make a deal despite its reservations.    

Russia has its own motives for brokering a deal too. A war in the Middle East would not be in Russia’s best interests, nor would nuclear proliferation. If Iran were to acquire a nuclear weapon Saudi Arabia has already indicated that it would pursue the same course. As the world’s two largest nuclear powers, Russia and the US have a joint responsibility to prevent such an outcome.

Additionally, under the new Trump administration the US has already begun distancing itself from Syria’s new leadership, partially due to domestic pressure from Christian groups concerned about the violence faced by Syrian Christians after the removal of Assad. This policy shift creates an opportunity for a strategic alignment between Washington and Moscow after years of competing for influence in Syria. 

Despite the potential for progress, several major obstacles remain. The warming of US-Russia relations does not erase the deep-rooted distrust between the parties. Similarly, this scepticism is even more pronounced in the fractured relationship between Washington and Tehran.

Iran’s primary concern is that Washington cannot be trusted to uphold agreements. This is a logical reaction given Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the previous Iran nuclear deal signed under the Obama administration. Furthermore, the domestic political climates in the US and Iran add layers of complexity to potential negotiations.

Internal divisions

Trump’s adversarial stance towards the US foreign policy establishment has created internal divisions, which may make long-term diplomatic commitments difficult to sustain. Meanwhile, on the Iranian side political factions are divided between those who support negotiations and those who do not trust Washington’s intentions.

Trump’s role in the assassination of Gen Qassem Soleimani has further fuelled Iranian distrust, especially given that European assessments suggest Iran had remained compliant with former president Barack Obama’s nuclear agreement before Trump abandoned it. These may be obstacles too large to overcome, especially as Trump continues to use threatening language when addressing Iran. 

Another source of unpredictability is the uncertain future of Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei. His deteriorating health raises questions about his successor and the direction Iran’s leadership may take in the coming years. If a new supreme leader takes a more hardline stance, efforts to come to an agreement could prove even more difficult. 

External actors may also seek to derail negotiations. The Israeli government has openly opposed peace talks, and Trump’s close relationship with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu indicates Tel Aviv’s influence could play a crucial role in shaping Washington’s approach. Should negotiations falter, Trump could be persuaded to consider risky military actions. 

Russia’s relationship with Iran is not without its complexities either. Some Iranian politicians fear Moscow may prioritise its relationship with Washington over its alliance with Tehran, particularly if the US offers Russia concessions regarding Ukraine. If the Ukraine conflict remains unresolved Moscow could align more closely with Tehran undermining its detente with Washington.

Yet, despite the intricacies dialogue remains the best path to peace. As Russia, China and Iran conduct joint military drills and Israel continues to fight a multifront war across the region, a constructive negotiation process is needed to help avoid an even more devastating and potentially global conflict. 

Russia in particular could play an important role in helping to broker an agreement between the US and Iran. While several obstacles remain, the benefits of a stable international order undoubtedly make these efforts worthwhile, and if Russia can help in any way Moscow’s mediation should be encouraged.

• Shubitz is an independent Brics analyst.