The American administration is shocked by revelations that Iran has the support of both China and Russia in its effort to repel what it describes as the unjustified and illegal attack by the United States and Israel.
The possible cooperation between Russia and Iran constitutes an event of enormous geopolitical importance and raises concerns about the stability of the Middle East and the global strategic balance.
This was underlined by national security analyst Aaron McLean in a recent interview with CBS News, noting that “when a major adversary like Russia comes to assist Iran, that raises concerns”.
These statements are not exaggerated.
Russia now possesses significant capabilities to provide strategic support to Tehran, mainly in the field of target planning, without necessarily becoming involved in the direct coordinated execution of attacks.
It is also emphasized that the strategic cooperation does not simply involve logistical support, but also the exchange of critical information that can alter the balance of power in the region.
In an environment where the Middle East remains extremely fluid, and the United States is challenged by both regional and global actors, the Russia–Iran cooperation can be considered a turning point that questions the traditional strategic superiority of the West.
The nature of Russian assistance to Iran
According to reports by NBC News, Russia transfers to the Iranian side information regarding the location of United States forces in the Middle East, without however participating in the coordination of the attacks.
This distinction is important: Moscow has not declared itself a “military advisor” directly guiding Iran, but it possesses critical intelligence that can strengthen Tehran’s ability to target strategic objectives.
The American reaction to these developments was awkward and contradictory.
The special envoy of the United States president, Steve Witkoff, reportedly asked Russia not to transfer information to Iran about American facilities in the Middle East.
This constitutes an indirect but urgent appeal in the form of a message from United States president Donald Trump to his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin to stop assisting Iranian attacks against American targets in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf.
At the same time, the White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt stated that it does not matter whether Moscow helped Tehran or not, implying weakness or indifference at the strategic level.
The spokesperson of the Russian president, Dmitry Peskov, was asked about the issue but refused to make any comment.
This paradox shows how vulnerable the American position in the region has become.
Washington, while maintaining strong military bases and allied forces, does not appear able to prevent the exchange of strategic intelligence between Russia and Iran.
This development highlights a fundamental shift in the balance of power: the United States is losing the monopoly of information and strategic initiative that it held in the Middle East for decades.
The strategic importance of Russian support
The provision of intelligence to Iran, even if limited to mapping American positions, has multiple consequences:
1) Increase in the effectiveness of Iranian attacks: Iran can now plan its operations with greater accuracy, reducing the risk of failure and strengthening its deterrent power.
2) Maintaining an advantage for asymmetric strikes: Russia creates strategic influence in the region without assuming direct military cost.
3) Pressure on Europe and the United States: The possible effectiveness of Iranian attacks increases the vulnerability of Western interests and strengthens Moscow’s geopolitical demands.
Essentially, Russia may provide its ally Iran with “informational superiority”, which in a low intensity war or asymmetric conflicts may be more decisive than physical military power.
The reaction of the United States - Anxiety and political confusion
The stance of Washington, as reflected in the statements of president Donald Trump and White House officials, shows confusion and underestimation of the seriousness of the issue.
Trump described as “stupid” the question from journalists regarding the provision of information from Russia to Iran, while Leavitt attempted to divert public opinion by stating that it does not matter whether the assistance occurred or not.
This tactic reveals two critical points:
1) Washington is afraid to admit its weakness in the Middle East, as a public admission could weaken its prestige toward allies and adversaries.
2) The focus on statements and communication management downgrades the essential strategic evaluation of the consequences.
In other words, the United States is trying to manage the issue as a journalistic matter, while in reality it constitutes a critical geopolitical event with strategic consequences.
Nevertheless the urgent message from Trump to Putin through Witkoff proves that the American side was shocked by the development.
The broader framework: Russia, Iran and the new Middle East
The possible Russia–Iran cooperation should not be interpreted as an isolated incident. It is part of a broader framework of geopolitical changes.
Russia seeks to expand its influence in the region without becoming directly involved in high intensity conflicts.
The transfer of intelligence is a low cost tool with high strategic return.
Iran strengthens its security and deterrent capacity through access to information about the movements of United States forces, reducing uncertainty in a region that remains extremely fluid.
The United States loses the monopoly of strategic information, which limits its ability to determine developments and manage conflicts according to its interests.
This new reality suggests that the Middle East is entering an era of competition in the emerging multipolar world, where strategic information becomes a primary weapon, and the asymmetry between state powers and regional actors increases significantly.
The strategic power of Russia
Russia appears to be using cooperation with Iran to demonstrate a new form of strategic power.
This is not direct military involvement, but power through information and geopolitical choices.
By transferring information about American positions, Russia:
1) Strengthens Iran’s ability to conduct effective military operations
2) Partially controls the escalation of conflicts without assuming direct cost
3) Sends a message to the West that its strategic planning can be overturned
This form of strategic power is based on a fundamental principle: knowledge and information can be more decisive than traditional military power.
What happened to the United States - Miscalculation or underestimation?
The American stance toward Russia–Iran cooperation reveals two parallel weaknesses:
1) Administrative embarrassment: The Trump administration and its associates attempted to downgrade the issue publicly without proceeding to substantial strategic countermeasures.
2) Strategic vulnerability: The inability of the United States to prevent the transfer of information indicates that the region has become harder to control, even for the world’s largest military power.
The result is that the United States is losing not only control but also the ability to shape developments according to its interests.
The balance is changing
The possible Russia–Iran cooperation constitutes a significant geopolitical event that changes the balance in the Middle East.
Russia uses informational superiority as a strategic tool, while Iran increases its deterrent power without assuming direct cost.
The United States, instead of shaping a strategic response, focuses on communication management, underestimating the real consequences. The result is a new reality where information becomes a weapon of power while the West loses control of the region.
The Middle East is turning into a multipolar field of strategic competition.
This development concerns not only Russia and Iran.
It concerns the entire world and the global strategic balance.
If Washington does not revise its approach and regain control of information in the region, the consequences for the West and global security may be catastrophic in the long term.
The Russia–Iran cooperation is not merely a news event.
It is a strategic shift that determines the future of the Middle East and the position of the United States in the world.
Secret US intelligence report warns Washington cannot overthrow Iran regime
At the same time a secret report from a United States intelligence agency warns that an extensive military campaign against Iran is unlikely to succeed in overthrowing the regime, as revealed by the Washington Post.
At the same time it is emphasized that the existing opposition groups do not appear to have the capacity to take power even after a significant conflict.
The assessment of United States intelligence services highlights the risks of a prolonged and unpredictable war aimed at achieving regime change, while presenting key findings:
1) Questionable capability of the opposition: The existing Iranian opposition movements do not appear to have the strength to take control of the country after a United States military operation.
2) Resilience of the regime: Bombings and broad military actions are unlikely to cause the collapse of the Iranian leadership, which will most likely strengthen internal security and control.
3) Limited effectiveness of the attacks: Despite damage to infrastructure, air or ground attacks are not sufficient to impose regime change.
4) Focus on betrayals and defections: Substantial change would require massive defections within the state and military apparatus, something that is not expected at present, according to analyses by ACLED.
The report notes that achieving regime change through military means entails high cost and great uncertainty, making the likelihood of failure far greater than any short term military victory.
This assessment reinforces the image that the Islamic Republic of Iran remains strongly resilient even under intense external pressure, and that efforts to overthrow it through military force may lead to a prolonged conflict without substantial results.
The report was completed shortly before the war
The report, which was completed shortly before the start of the military operation of the United States and Israel on 28 February, evaluated different scenarios of military action, from targeted strikes against the leadership to a large scale campaign.
In all cases the analysts concluded that the military and religious establishment of Iran possesses mechanisms of succession and stability that can maintain continuity of power even after serious blows.
Resilience of the Iranian power system
According to the assessment of United States intelligence services, even the possible assassination of the supreme leader Ali Khamenei would not cause the collapse of the system.
The succession is expected to be determined by the powerful religious body of the country, the Assembly of Experts, while an important role is also played by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Behind the scenes intense political maneuvering is unfolding around the possible successor, with the name Mojtaba Khamenei at the center of the scenarios, although no official announcement has been made.
According to Western security sources, his candidacy is reportedly supported by circles of the Revolutionary Guards, while other powerful figures such as Ali Larijani appear cautious.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών