Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Russia & Iran

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    8

    Default Russia & Iran

    How do you feel in regards to this administration putting so much faith in Moscow not only to allow strict sanctions on Iran but to also see those through and help enforce them for as long as absolutely necessary? There are many that would argue that Russia wants to see us fail and in many respects I do agree with that notion. However, in the case of Iran it seems to me that allowing negotiations to fail would actually work against Russian interests. That’s assuming that they feel as if Iran would actually be attacked should proper sanctions not be upheld. As is a potentially defiant Iran gives them power within the region and of course they supply a huge amount of arms to them as well. So, would it be worth taking the risk of losing that, again assuming if push came to shove and we actually were to shove?

    What are your thoughts on all of that? Are we dreaming in assuming that Russia will help us out with Iran? Please remember I come here to learn from the experts, so please don’t blast me if you feel that I’m posting anything outlandish. thanks
    Last edited by The Olive Sword; 10-02-2009 at 05:39 AM.

  2. #2
    Council Member Kevin23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Olive Sword View Post
    How do you feel in regards to this administration putting so much faith in Moscow not only to allow strict sanctions on Iran but to also see those through and help enforce them for as long as absolutely necessary? There are many that would argue that Russia wants to see us fail and in many respects I do agree with that notion. However, in the case of Iran it seems to me that allowing negotiations to fail would actually work against Russian interests. That’s assuming that they feel as if Iran would actually be attacked should proper sanctions not be upheld. As is a potentially defiant Iran gives them power within the region and of course they supply a huge amount of arms to them as well. So, would it be worth taking the risk of losing that, again assuming if push came to shove and we actually were to shove?

    What are your thoughts on all of that? Are we dreaming in assuming that Russia will help us out with Iran? Please remember I come here to learn from the experts, so please don’t blast me if you feel that I’m posting anything outlandish. thanks

    I personally think that when it comes down to it, the US wouldn't get much if anything out of the Russians. For many reasons, but mainly because the Russian leadership has little in in terms of interest to cooperate with the West on the issue of a nuclear Iran. One reason is that Russia has been helping Iran to some extent build it's nulcear program, as well as you mentioned, supplying arms to the Iranians. Also given how confrontial Moscow has been in terms of how it has taken it's relations with the West over the past couple of years, I don't think the Russians can't be trusted as partners on this issue because of how they view the US and much of the West, as well as their material support for Iran and to some extent it's allies in the region. Even though the Russian leadership is sending rather mixed signs at the moment.

    That is my opinion on this issue.

  3. #3
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    If Iran gets a long-range nuclear capability, then we have more moral authority / popular support in resurrecting our efforts at deploying an ABM shield in eastern Europe. Russia apparently doesn't want that. We will be even more justified if we have evidence that Iran developed said capability with Russia's assistance. I think Russia wants the commercial benefits of trading their nuclear know-how, but not the problems of a rogue nuclear state poking us in the ribs and causing second and third order effects for Russia.

    Full disclosure: I'm not a strategy guy.

  4. #4
    Council Member Kevin23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    If Iran gets a long-range nuclear capability, then we have more moral authority / popular support in resurrecting our efforts at deploying an ABM shield in eastern Europe. Russia apparently doesn't want that. We will be even more justified if we have evidence that Iran developed said capability with Russia's assistance. I think Russia wants the commercial benefits of trading their nuclear know-how, but not the problems of a rogue nuclear state poking us in the ribs and causing second and third order effects for Russia.

    Full disclosure: I'm not a strategy guy.
    I'm thinking though that Russia would have something to gain strategically by supporting Iran in it's nuclear ambitions. Because it could use it's deals with Iran as foundation to having a partner in the Middle East?

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Yeah, they might have something to gain. I'm just thinking that the cost might outweigh the benefit (fallout - no pun intended - of Iran getting nukes could be resurrection of the ABM shield in E. Europe; Iran would also probably start misbehaving, provoking ire of the rest of the mideast and west). And, of course, keep in mind my original disclosure.

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    8

    Default

    That as well, but what I was also thinking was Russia possibly losing an ally and arms deals should we actually invade Iran, again if needed. From what I understand simply bombing their facilities would not suffice, a full scale invasion would be required. Anything less and they'll most likely strike Israel in retaliation and do much more to destabilize our efforts in Iraq. Not to mention the new underground facility that’s purposefully placed near their holy city, making bombing it an extremely tricky proposition. Thus, with that said would we not attempt to overthrow M. Ah. and install a new pro-western government, essentially giving us stronger influence in Iran (as we had in the past) and diminishing their strong ties with Russia as a result. Now if Russia does not believe that this administration would conduct such an attack if talks failed then that obviously changes everything.

    Am I making some bad false assumptions here, or does that add up? From what I hear the initial meetings went well, but I haven’t found any specifics just yet.

  7. #7
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,007

    Default

    Sunday, March 21, 2010

    Window on Eurasia: Putin Wants Israeli Attack on Iran Because That Would Send Oil Prices Up, Latynina Says

    http://windowoneurasia.blogspot.com/...s-israeli.html

    Ps During last week there have been in Russia couple articles about shale gas impact to Russian. Among other thing author asked if North Stram and South Stream pipeline projects have any point in the future. If this shale gas techonology will spread to Europe and China, then those are bad news for Russia's wallet.

    1 article from Economist.

    http://www.economist.com/business-fi...ry_id=15661889

  8. #8
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    589

    Default Russian nuclear assitance more nuanced that most think...

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin23 View Post
    One reason is that Russia has been helping Iran to some extent build it's nulcear program, as well as you mentioned, supplying arms to the Iranians. .

    .
    A nuclear Iran is not good news from the Russian perspective either. In fact, part of the reason they are are assisting the Iranians is to ensure that Iran's nuclear power ambitions are not directed at Russia. It's the Russian's way of keeping an eye on things whilsts finding meaningful employment to its own specialists who would otherwise be working for the Iranians anyway (but without GRU/SVR supervision!). Russia would rather "co-operate" with its neighbour to the south (let's not forget that) rather than with its former peer competitor with whom it has no borders. It is Iran that sits on the Caspian, it is Iran (and Turkey) that are attempting to spread their influence through Central Asia and the Caucasus (inc. Chechnya) (sunni Turkic peoples for the latter and Shia tribes for the former). Russian policy is driven by pragmatism (for the most part) with lingering suspicions about the West (i.e., the US) especially given the Georgian Affair of a few years ago.

  9. #9
    Council Member AdamG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hiding from the Dreaded Burrito Gang
    Posts
    2,598

    Default

    ASTANA Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday joined the Chinese and Russian leaders in a rare encounter at a summit in Kazakhstan, where he launched a new attack on the "slavers and colonisers" of the West.
    Host Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev urged the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), a security group regarded as a NATO rival founded in 2001, to take a more active role in ensuring regional security.
    But most attention was focused on Ahmadinejad, who was absent from last year's SCO meeting in Tashkent after the UN Security Council agreed sanctions against Iran and was making a rare appearance at a big international meeting.
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...090de182f4.641
    A scrimmage in a Border Station
    A canter down some dark defile
    Two thousand pounds of education
    Drops to a ten-rupee jezail


    http://i.imgur.com/IPT1uLH.jpg

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •