Putin to trade Iran for Ukraine? / Zandi: Temporarily handing uranium over to Russia would make its return difficult / Russia opposes Iran's nuclear test

Davoud Gharayagh Zandi, political science professor at Shahid Beheshti University, told Safir Arjan: If Iran has the resilience to hold out for the next two years, Russian mediation is off the table; at the same time, efforts to move toward a nuclear test are not only unacceptable to Russia but also unacceptable in general.

Ambassador of Arjan - Mohammad Aref Moazi: Along with the continuation of the Iran war and the escalation of the energy crisis, the reports of the agreement between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin regarding the import of Russian diesel to America have raised questions about the future of Moscow-Tehran relations. Will Russia withdraw its support to Iran in order to please Washington and score points in cases such as Ukraine and sanctions?

In the meantime, Moscow's proposal to receive Iran's enriched uranium is also considered as a possible way to solve the nuclear crisis; A proposal that faces serious uncertainties without clear guarantees about Iran's security and the country's nuclear rights. Trump's failure to end the war in Ukraine has also raised doubts about the ability of the two presidents to reach lasting agreements; Agreements that may be more subject to competition over the interests of powers than to solve crises.

In this regard, Ambassador Arjan talked to Daoud Gharayag Zandi, professor of political science at Shahid Beheshti University, to investigate this matter more closely.

In the following, you will read the details of Ambassador Arjan's conversation with Daud Gharayag Zandi;

Russia will stop Ukraine's attacks by partnering America in using its oil resources/Putin and Trump's agreement is temporary

*** Donald Trump recently reached an agreement with Vladimir Putin on the import of Russian diesel to the United States; In the situation that the Iran war continues and the increase in energy prices has become one of the challenges of the American government. Should this agreement be considered a sign of the strategic closeness of the two leaders or a temporary deal to secure Washington's economic and political interests? What effect will such an agreement have on Russia's stance on the Iran war?

The United States is seeking to minimize Iran's use of the Strait of Hormuz during this period, and Russia, by partnering with the United States in the use of its oil resources, will stop Ukraine's attacks on its energy facilities. The United States is seeking to reduce the price of diesel as the main fuel in various agricultural and industrial fields in conditions close (about 20 days) to the congress mid-term elections, and Russia has also done this to reduce the pressure of sanctions and sell its energy. It should be emphasized here that politics is not the domain of stubborn hostile behavior or all-round friendship, politics is an effort to secure the country's national interests under any conditions and with any side.

Therefore, this action is two-way: one is to control the internal conditions and the price of diesel fuel, and the other is to increase their resilience, they have adopted a wise and reasonable behavior. Based on this, the US seeks to minimize Iran's exploitation of the Strait of Hormuz during this period, and Russia, by partnering with the US in the use of its oil resources, stops Ukraine's attacks on its energy facilities. So, at this point, this Russian policy is temporary and does not indicate a serious change in Russia's behavior towards the Iran war.

It is logical for Russia to stop supporting Iran in order to reach an agreement with the US. A deal with the US can make Tehran more dependent on Moscow.

*** Given Putin's efforts to maintain relations with Washington and Trump's desire to reach an agreement with Moscow, is it possible for Russia to withdraw its political support for Iran in order to gain concessions from America? Basically, how likely is it that Iran will become part of a larger deal between Putin and Trump on issues like Ukraine, sanctions, and regional security?

As I mentioned in the explanation of your previous question, the field of politics is the provision of national interests by any country. If it is assumed that America is going to give a big concession to Russia regarding Ukraine, this possibility is not only possible but also very reasonable from the point of view of Russia's interests because it will not only be the winner of this war but will establish its dominance as the guardian power in the expanding Eurasian region. At the same time, there may be an assumption in Russia that Iran will not reach an agreement with the US under any circumstances, or that Iran's domestic environment is not ready for this serious change in behavior after more than 4 decades, and this deal with the US will make Tehran more dependent on Moscow.

But this possibility is not close to reality; Because such a deal is actually a kind of serious gap in Western civilization between America on one side and Europe and even Canada on the other side, such a necessity in American foreign policy is not only logical, but it will be a sign of Russia's deep influence in the visible and hidden structures of America, about which there are many sensitivities in this country. By inciting the Ukrainian people to hold elections and removing Zelensky, the Trump administration is trying to prepare the ground for the acceptance of the current situation in Ukraine and to end the crisis in any way possible and to establish its victory narrative for the end of the worst and most complex historical crisis in the Eurasian region and the world since the 19th century, which could become the basis for a serious conflict between the great powers of the European Union on one side and Russia on the other.

Handing over uranium to Russia, even temporarily, will greatly reduce the possibility of its return to Iran/ Diluting this volume or selling it to the market of these materials is a more suitable solution.

*** Russia has repeatedly announced that it is ready to receive Iran's enriched uranium on its soil; A proposal that Moscow has introduced as a way to help solve the nuclear crisis. What is the political and technical meaning of this proposal? Can the transfer of uranium reserves to Russia provide a basis for stopping the war and agreeing with the United States, or without clear guarantees about Iran's security, the removal of sanctions and the country's nuclear rights, such a proposal cannot be the basis of a stable agreement?

Handing over these materials even temporarily and in trust to Russia will greatly reduce the grounds for their return to Iran, and Russia is not willing to accept any nuclear country, whether Iran or Ukraine, in order to dominate the new Eurasia under the domination of Moscow. The most important issue that America has obviously had to justify the war with Iran is this very frequent statement that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. But the important issue is why this country was attacked in the 12-day war, despite Iran's repeated declarations that it does not want to have nuclear weapons and is ready to negotiate to prove it? This is a sign of America's all-out support for Israel and its efforts to create a new Middle East.

Now the US has seriously destroyed the country's nuclear facilities, but despite having more than 400 kg of materials with 60% enrichment, Iran should logically take steps towards nuclear escape if possible. Whether this possibility exists in the country or not is not important at the moment, but what is important is that the US attack on the country's nuclear facilities, strategically, has provided the transition to this step, and the US is looking to make sure in this regard. In this situation, this is an important tactic next to the Strait of Hormuz to gain points.

Handing over these materials even temporarily and in trust to Russia will greatly reduce the grounds for their return to Iran, and Russia is not willing to accept any nuclear country, whether Iran or Ukraine, to dominate the new Eurasia under Moscow's rule. Based on this, the existence of these materials still poses a military threat and at the same time it is possible to gain points for Iran, which is a more suitable solution for Iran to dilute this volume or sell it to the market of these materials, which was also foreseen in the JCPOA.

The Ukraine crisis is the most important crisis that can show the dynamics of power in the 21st century

*** Trump has been promising to end the war in Ukraine for almost two years, but this war is still going on; Now we are facing Iran war and energy crisis. What does this failure to resolve the Ukraine war show about the extent of Putin's influence over Trump's decisions and their ability to reach lasting agreements? Can the personal relations of the two presidents really solve the strategic differences of the two countries?

As mentioned above, the Ukraine crisis is the most important crisis that can show the dynamics of power in the 21st century and how the balance of power in the world will be in this century. Accordingly, such a crisis with the direct involvement of Russia and Europe, and then the indirect involvement of the United States and China and India cannot be analyzed in the form of personal relations. In fact, the important question about the Ukraine crisis and the issue of Iran and the Strait of Hormuz and the energy crisis is whether these two crises have strongly affected the unilateralism of the United States, and if so, does this mean a transition to multilateralism, or even more seriously, should we witness a new bipolar system between the United States and China?

If America is able to stabilize its international power, the Ukraine crisis will be at the expense of Russia and Iran, and if it causes multilateralism, then Ukraine and Iran are victims of these conditions. With the loss of its eastern regions, Ukraine and Iran, because it acted against the United States in this game, will rely more on the east to be safe.

If Iran has the resilience for the next two years, Russia's mediation is out of the question/trying to move towards a nuclear test is not acceptable for Russia.

*** Taking into account the continuation of the Iran war, the impasse in the Ukraine case and the efforts of both sides to maintain or expand their interests, how do you evaluate the prospects of relations between Tehran, Moscow and Washington? Can Russia become an effective mediator to end the Iran war, or will the conflicting interests of the powers make Moscow, like other international actors, use it to score points rather than seek to resolve the crisis?

If Iran has the ability to be resilient for the next two years, Russian mediation is ruled out, and at the same time, trying to move towards nuclear testing is not only unacceptable for Russia, but it will lead to more attacks against the country and a decrease in resilience. Currently, Russia has mostly played the role of political support in the United Nations and mutual military exchanges, but if the situation in the country goes out of control for any reason, then it should be seen what strategic choice the country is willing to make; Because in that situation, America can only ask for Iran's surrender, and to avoid this unpleasant thing, Iran will follow Russia's big brother?

If Iran has the ability to be resilient for the next two years, Russia's mediation is ruled out, and at the same time, trying to move toward nuclear testing is not only unacceptable for Russia, but it will lead to more attacks against the country and a decrease in resilience; In this situation, what would be the less harmful option without deeper and more surgery?