【Text/Observer Network Columnist Sun Jialing】
From 2014 to 2022, the two Russian-Ukrainian conflicts have witnessed the progress of Relations between Russia and Iran, but have also posed new challenges to the strategic coordination between the two countries.
During the Crimean crisis in 2014, although Iran was close to Russia, it was unable to support Moscow on the issue of Crimean sovereignty, after all, Iran also faced internal pressure from the Kurds, Baluches and other ethnic minorities for autonomy; on the other hand, Iran had to work with Russia to buffer the strategic oppression of the West and also had the political need to meet the internal anti-American conservative sentiment.
In the end, Iran expressed its "opposition to external interference in Ukraine" and absent from the voting scene of UN General Assembly Resolution 68/262 calling on countries not to recognize Crimea's ownership referendum, striking a delicate balance between relations with Russia and the right of minorities to self-determination.
Over the years, Russia-Iran relations have been steadily heating up under the catalyst of geopolitics and great power games. First, the two countries share similar strategic goals in Syria, Russia propping up the Assad regime, Iran using this to consolidate the "Shia Crescent" in order to establish a national strategic buffer zone, Iran has more ideological considerations;
In the field of military industry, the arms trade between Iran and Russia is stable, including S-300 air defense systems, various types of warplanes and artillery; in the diplomatic game, Russia has always supported the operation of the Iran Nuclear Agreement (JCPOA), and the interaction between the two sides has risen sharply due to Trump's unilateral withdrawal in 2018; in addition to signing the "China-Iran Twenty-Five-Year Comprehensive Cooperation Agreement" with China in 2021, Iran also officially submitted the "China-Iran Twenty-Five-Year Comprehensive Cooperation Agreement" with China on January 20, 2022 when Iranian President Ibrahim Lacey visited Moscow. Draft Russian-Iranian Twenty-Year Strategic Cooperation Agreement.
However, the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, although the two countries have not been estranged by the war, they have been forced to disagree after the nuclear agreement negotiations have become a chip for the United States, and anti-Russian sentiment has even emerged in Iran. In the end, Russia chose to take a step backwards to maintain Russia-Iran strategic cooperation for many years.
Iran's foreign minister said there were "two issues" left before the completion of the Iranian nuclear negotiations. Image source: Visual China
From the perspective of the international structure, Tehran and Moscow are indeed back to back, but in order to take a long-term approach, they must still understand each other and trust each other in order to avoid the West's stitches.
Several aspects of Iranian public opinion
At the beginning of the war, given Tehran's long friendship with Moscow, Iran did show a pro-Russian stance, becoming one of the few countries that "understood" Russia in its official capacity.
Hours after the Russian military operation on February 24, the Iranian presidential office issued a statement saying that President Lesi had spoken to Putin, and the two sides reached a consensus that NATO's eastward expansion "poses a serious threat to the stability and security of independent countries in different regions", Lacey added, hoping that "what is happening" will eventually be "beneficial to the country and the region". But despite this, Iran's attitude is still cautious compared to Syrian President Assad's direct praise that "Russia is correcting history", which is in line with the balance considerations in 2014.
On March 1, Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei delivered a one-hour televised speech, setting the tone that the Russian-Ukrainian conflict was a crisis provoked by the "US mafia regime", and Ukraine was unfortunately involved in it, becoming a victim of the "policy of Western powers", and Iran did not want to see a country's infrastructure destroyed and people displaced, so it "supported the armistice".
Supreme Leader of Iran: The United States is at the root of the current crisis in Ukraine. Image source: Visual China
Khamenei also concluded that the world should learn two major lessons from the Ukraine crisis: first, Western support is a mirage, from Afghanistan to Ukraine; second, popular support is the key, "If the Ukrainian government had the support of the whole people, the situation would not have evolved to where it is today." ”
It can be seen from the statements of the above leaders that although Iran believes that the provocation between the United States and NATO is the root cause of the conflict, it does not actively affirm war as a solution, but calls for a ceasefire negotiation between the two sides. In contrast, the statements of Iran's semi-official institutions and public opinion are more direct in talking about national interests.
Iranian scholar Hussein Aley, for example, said that Iranians know Russia's "invasion" character well, after all, in the past 200 years, the Tsar has taken the Greater Caucasus from Iran, and the Soviet Union has supported Iraq in the Iran-Iraq War.
"Unfortunately, today the Russians are also trying to take over Iran's negotiations with the United States for a nuclear deal and prevent Iranian gas from entering Europe." Alay suggested that the conflict is an opportunity for Iran to pursue a policy of "no east, no west", and although Iran has developed relations with China and Russia, it cannot rely on the two countries one-sidedly, and it must also strive to establish balanced economic exchanges with the West.
However, international affairs scholar Amir Ali Abbott believes that the conflict has the following benefits for Iran: First, the process of NATO's eastward expansion has been disrupted, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia in the Caucasus should not have the opportunity to join in the short term, and Iran's northern border defense is not threatened; second, sanctioned Russia can cooperate with Iran more recklessly and no longer have to consider many prohibitions set by the United States in the past; third, Turkey and Israel may choose to be close to Washington and alienate Moscow, so that, Iran's Middle East strategy has more room to play.
Iran's international affairs and diplomacy scholar Mustafa Najafi also said that whether the Iranian people like Russia or not, they must think about the following two points: First, the West has sanctioned Iran for 20 years, and Ukraine can have other significance in addition to supporting the West and accusing Russia? Second, it is true that Russia is waging war, but if Ukraine joins NATO, the Caucasus countries may be the next wave, and NATO is better off ending in Ukraine than forcing it into northern Iran. Najafi concluded that Iran's best strategy today is not to support war, but also not to condemn Russia.
In predicting the direction of war and the post-war international order, there is also a heated discussion in all walks of life in Iran. For example, Abdullah Ganji, editor-in-chief of the Hamshahri newspaper, analyzed in the article and carefully examined Putin's 3100-word passionate speech before the war, and several key words appeared frequently as follows: Russia 23 times, the United States 10 times, the West 10 times, Ukraine 10 times, NATO 10 times, the Soviet Union 9 times, and the "Empire of Lies" 3 times; the Donbass region, which was used as a reason for war, actually appeared only 5 times.
Ganji believes that the real purpose of Putin's military campaign is to revive the glory of the former Soviet Union with modern nationalism and erase Russia's long humiliation over the past 30 years, and the Donbass problem is only a smoke bomb to cover this goal, nor will it be the "end point" to eliminate 30 years of humiliation.
But Ganji also pointed out that Putin will act because of his great fear of the United States and his belief that American power is real, "contrary to our Iranian view of the United States, which we believe is weakening and declining." ”
Shariati, a China expert at Shahid Bekhshti University, agrees that the war is a key first step in Russia's restructuring of Europe's security architecture, that Ukraine is nothing more than a short-term goal, and that Russia wants to break up the post-Cold War order and play a role in the nascent architecture.
But Shariati pointed out that this conflict will not change the bipolar structure of the international order, Russia's status is now comparable to that of Europe, it belongs to the "second-class power", China and the United States are the focus of the new international politics, and Russia wants to maintain its status as a great power, not to become a superpower.
In terms of the possible impact on China, Shariati pointed out that the Russo-Ukrainian war brought complex situational challenges to China. At first glance, the strategic pressure of the West will be forced to move to Europe, China will gain strategic space, can also show a certain degree of mediation influence through conflict, and can gain Russia's strategic dependence; but China has always strived to achieve a balance between the West and Russia, and has always adhered to the foreign policy of non-interference in internal affairs, respect for sovereignty, and peaceful coexistence.
On similar issues, Ali Bigdelli, an iranian expert on international affairs, has a different view. It first mentioned that Iran has been at odds with the West for many years and has close contacts with Russia, and it is a natural position not to condemn Moscow, and the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has exposed the collective defeat of the United States and the West, and the situation is moving in Iran's favor, "It can be seen that China is also smart to 'support' Putin's actions, because if Russia can win on the battlefield in Ukraine, it will be able to promote China's future victory in the Taiwan Strait." But as for how to "facilitate", it does not talk much.
Synthesizing the above remarks, it can be seen that Iran's official response to the conflict is quite cautious, neither willing to stand against Russia, but also did not high-profile praise for the war; and although the people have the emotional reaction of the empire's old grievances, they also believe that the Ukrainian war is difficult to say justice, but they generally agree that the conflict is in Iran's national interests, especially on the issue of resisting NATO's entry into the Caucasus and shielding the threat of Iran's northern border.
However, the negotiations on the Iran nuclear agreement, which have been fermenting since early March, have changed the direction of public opinion. Before that, the Iranian people may still be a game between "national interests" and "historical hatred"; after the nuclear agreement negotiations changed, the anti-Russian rhetoric in the public opinion field exploded in an instant.
The nuclear agreement sparks conflict
And the root cause of everything must start from the US sanctions against Russia.
On March 8, Biden announced a ban on Russian oil imports, followed by the United Kingdom, saying that it would gradually ban Russian oil and its related products by the end of 2022. Such a move, which seems to be a huge impact on Russia, actually creates a new problem for the United States.
The Iranian nuclear negotiations have entered the "final stage", and energy trade is "ready to go". Image source: Visual China
First of all, in terms of the trade data of the United States and Russia in 2021, the United States imports an average of 199,000 barrels of Russian crude oil per day, so the share accounts for only 5% of Russia's crude oil exports and 3% of the US import market, so the imposition of an oil embargo on Russia is actually difficult to hit the Russian economy, nor will it make the United States face an oil shortage crisis. But such a move would send international oil prices "soaring," keep inflation high in the United States, and eventually ignite outrageous public resentment, destroy Biden's already weak governance halo, and crush the Democratic Party's November election.
Looking at the recent market trends, disturbed by the smoke and smoke of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, oil prices have hovered in the high range, the sensitive market has not waited for the news of the success of the Russian-Ukrainian peace talks, and the United States has repeatedly called for a boycott of Russian oil, resulting in a continuous increase in prices.
When Biden announced the news on March 8, the NYMEX WTI crude oil futures April contract rose $4.30, or 3.6%, to close at $123.70 per barrel, and the ICE Brent crude oil futures May contract rose $4.77, or 3.9%, to close at $127.98 per barrel.
At the same time, the US inflation rate has exceeded 7% in December 2020, and it has reached 7.9% in the third year of this year, and with the 8% threshold at hand, Biden has no capital to ignore it, whether it is to create good news or open up new oil sources that can fill the gap in Russia, the United States is bound to take action.
In addition, in view of the high dependence of European countries on Russian oil and gas, the current oil embargo on Russia is more of a wishful one-man show between Britain and the United States, and it is difficult to form large-scale joint sanctions, but if there are new suppliers with a scale of more than one million barrels per day entering the market at this time, Europe may respond to the call of the US oil embargo and jointly beat Russia back to the era of shock therapy. Therefore, in order to maintain the prestige of the great powers and completely crush Russia, it is also necessary for the United States to find new sources of oil.
Looking at the current situation, in order to meet the above strategic needs, the United States has only two options in addition to urging shale oil merchants to "stand on their own feet": ask the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to increase production, or lift the ban on Iranian and Venezuelan crude oil.
However, the OPEC has a divergent position on the increase in production, although the UAE has made a positive statement, but in the end it has not been able to reach a collective consensus with other members; Saudi Arabia has lacked interest in cooperating with the increase in production at the beginning, and now there is also a rumor that "it is proposed to use the renminbi to price part of the oil transaction", which is simply a thunderbolt for the White House. British Prime Minister Johnson also participated in the oil embargo against Russia, so he personally flew to Riyadh on March 16 to lobby for increased production, but the result was still "empty-handed".
British Prime Minister Johnson visited the UAE and Saudi Arabia to discuss issues such as energy security. Image source: Visual China
Seeing that the road to OPEC production increase is temporarily blocked, the United States turned to Venezuela and Iran. The former situation is relatively simple, if the United States lifts sanctions, show a certain degree of sincerity, Venezuela may not be unwilling to cooperate, now the United States has proposed an "oil for debt" plan, Venezuela although the position of pro-Russia, but may also agree under the consideration of national interests; compared with this, the lifting of the ban on Iranian crude oil is much more complicated, involving the negotiation of the Return of the United States to the nuclear agreement, but also involving complex major country relations.
First, the Iranian negotiating delegation strongly demanded that the United States promise that "the future will not be easy to withdraw from the nuclear agreement", but Biden also made it clear that he could not legally bind future presidents to abide by the agreement, which means that the unilateral withdrawal of the Trump era may repeat itself.
For Iran, this is tantamount to falling in the same place twice, which not only makes the government lose its face, but also disrupts the pace of development due to the sanctions from heaven, and the soaring public resentment will affect the stability of the regime, so Iran is extra careful this time, and the negotiations have been repeatedly delayed.
Nevertheless, iran's economy ultimately needs to inject living water, and the United States is now looking for Iran to open up oil sources. From the signing of the nuclear deal in 2015 until Trump's withdrawal in 2018, Iran could produce about 3.8 million barrels of oil per day; after 2018, it once fell to 1.9 million barrels per day; now it has recovered slightly, about 2.4 million barrels per day.
If the United States returns to the nuclear deal, the market estimates that Iran can increase production by an additional 500,000 barrels per day between April and May, and an additional 1.3 million barrels per day by the end of 2022, resuming production of more than 3.5 million barrels per day after 2015.
Therefore, as early as early February, when the United States speculated that Russia was about to "invade" Ukraine, the market optimistically predicted that the nuclear agreement would advance rapidly; after the war began in late February, the news that a new version of the nuclear agreement was about to be released spread around the world, and Iranian oil journalist Reza Zandi said on March 3 that "decisive news has been received, and the next 72-hour kernel agreement will be signed in Vienna", so the oil price fell back on the same day, and brent's May contract closed down $2.47 to $110.46 / barrel, down more than 2%.
However, Russia is on fire with the United States' trick of "lifting the ban on Iran and rescuing the market". To be sure, Moscow has always sided with Iran and supported the resumption of the nuclear deal, but this conflict involves its own granaries, and it is difficult for Russia to sit back and watch the United States score before ensuring its own interests.
Therefore, on March 5, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov asked the United States to issue a written guarantee that Western sanctions against Russia would not affect the economic and military cooperation between Russia and Iran; on March 7, Lavrov spoke with Iranian Foreign Minister Abdullahiyan, stressing that the return to the nuclear agreement must ensure that all signatory countries have "equal rights in all fields of unhindered cooperation."
Since then, the "72-hour" prophecy has come to an end, Europe and the United States have accused Russia of interfering in the negotiations, and the original cordial sentiment of the Iranian people towards Russia has also turned into "condemnation of hegemony" in an instant.
At the same time, Israel is not happy to see the nuclear agreement passed, its concerns have nothing to do with oil sources, but does not want Iran to unshackle and continue to develop nuclear technology.
In Tel Aviv's view, if Tehran does not have the United States to suppress, it will one day grow into a nuclear power in the Middle East, threatening its own survival, so it would rather continue the stalemate between the United States and Iran than achieve mutual benefit between the two sides because of the passage of the agreement.
Under this objective, Israel took the initiative to provoke a military conflict with Iran, first in the March 9 air strikes on Syria, resulting in the death of two Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps officers, resulting in Iran launching missiles to attack the U.S. consulate in Erbil, Iraq, on the 13th, and then instigating the destruction of Iran's underground nuclear facilities on March 14, but Iran successfully cracked. Israel's disturbance is not really to seriously defeat Iran's military, but is intended to disrupt the atmosphere of US-Iran negotiations and tie Washington to an anti-Iraq chariot.
Looking back at Iran's internal analysis, all walks of life and scholars have previously judged that the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is conducive to the advancement of the nuclear agreement, or at least will not hinder the progress of the nuclear agreement.
However, Russia and Israel have intervened successively, Israeli Prime Minister Bennett even took the lead in visiting Moscow to meet Putin at the beginning of the Outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, and did not follow up on the follow-up sanctions against Russia, Iran was indignant about this, believing that this was a big conspiracy of "Russian-Israeli collusion" to sacrifice the economic well-being of the Iranian people for the selfish interests of the two countries.
For example, the conservative pro-government media jomhouri-e Eslami wrote after the "72 Hours" prophecy was invalid: "In order to free the nuclear deal from being held hostage by Russia and Zionist forces, there are several feasible options at the moment, one of which is to expel Russia from the Iran nuclear deal." In fact, we would not have discussed this option if it were not for Russia's hostage-holding negotiations, but Iran cannot sacrifice our national interests for this or that. ”
But of course, there is no shortage of voices of stability maintenance in Iran, such as the newspaper Kayhan, which is considered to be the most conservative in Iran's position, wrote back: "When the United States trampled on the nuclear agreement in the past three years, where was the condemnation of reformists?" Or have the reformers ever reflected, and if they hadn't mistakenly believed in the West, how could the country have fallen into such a situation? ”
At the same time, it also defends Russia: "Is it Russia that sanctions Iran today?" Or is Russia unilaterally withdrawing from the nuclear deal? Even without a nuclear agreement, Iran's oil exports are still ongoing, and our foreign trade continues to grow. ”
Despite le Monde's best efforts, Iran's surging anti-Russian sentiment may have reached Moscow, forcing it to use secret mediation.
On March 15, Iranian Foreign Minister Abdullahyan visited Russia and met with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov. After the meeting, Lavrov publicly stated that Russia had received written assurances from the United States that the US sanctions against Russia would not affect cooperation between Russia and Iran. Abdullahyan also "reciprocated", saying that Russia did not create obstacles to the negotiations on the Iranian nuclear agreement, and now the ball is back in the hands of the United States. If there is no accident, the United States and Iran finally reached a consensus, and perhaps the nuclear agreement can really be restarted in the near future.
The Russian foreign minister held talks with the Iranian foreign minister. Image source: Visual China
Looking back at Iran's public opinion, Russia-Iran relations are indeed ideologically and geopolitically interdependent, otherwise Iran officials would not condemn the West at the beginning of the war, and the people would not think that Russia "blocked NATO's eastward expansion for Iran", "guarded the tranquility of the Caucasus for Iran", and even expected Russia to smash the old order.
But at the same time, Iran's theocratic government is not Assad of Syria, and it depends on Russia's support, especially in such a major national interest field as the nuclear agreement negotiations, it is impossible to fully obey Moscow's instructions, after all, the economy continues to wither, and the legitimacy of the theocratic government's rule can only continue to be eroded.
In the face of iran's uncoordinated noise, Russia is not deaf, which will lead to a final Russian-Iranian foreign ministers' meeting. But Moscow is still taking a small step forward at this time in order to make greater strides in the strategic coordination between the two countries.
Its willingness to allow the nuclear agreement to negotiate, if not privately with Iran to reach a certain amount of increase in production, trade target restrictions, is to look at the long-term cooperation mechanism: even if the United States returns to the nuclear agreement, the economic sanctions against Iran can not be completely eliminated overnight, so that the sanctioned Russia and Iran may be able to accompany China on the road of "de-dollarization"; and oil revenues can not only activate Iran's economy, but also increase Iran's purchasing power of Russian arms, such as Iran's long-awaited but unable to pay S-400 air defense system. The Su-35 fighter jet, etc., is ultimately a bilateral mutual benefit.
Moscow is not reckless about filling the gap in the market with Iranian oil, whether it is to increase production by 500,000 barrels per day or 1.3 million barrels per day. However, it is also well aware that the compound sanctions triggered by the Russo-Ukrainian war will not end with a paper peace agreement, and after the smoke and smoke recede, the public opinion war, economic war and diplomatic war will continue to pounce on Moscow.
Under this long journey, Iran and itself are the "evil regime" in the west's mouth, and still have to move forward hand in hand in the ideological and geopolitical field, so it is slightly concessionary at this time, in order to be in the same boat in the future.
This article is the exclusive manuscript of the observer network, the content of the article is purely the author's personal views, does not represent the platform views, unauthorized, may not be reproduced, otherwise will be investigated for legal responsibility. Pay attention to the observer network WeChat guanchacn, read interesting articles every day.