Replies

Iran is a vital startegic investment for Russia. Why? Because they are Shiite Muslims and as such they are different from Russia's mainly Sunni muslim population. The Russians are using Iran as a buffer state to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan - both Waahbist nations that are allied to America (and Pakistan has nukes and missiles to carry them) and were used by America to launch Wahhbist inspired liberation movements not only in Russia but in the 'Stans as well and in China and India.

Syria is also antaginistic to Saudi and Wahhabist Muslim goals.

The world is not black and white, Rockingham. The same reason America supported Saddam is the same reason Russia supports Iran - as a counter weight to even more dangerous Muslims - our Saudi and Paki allies.

So you Rockingham fall into the camp that says that the only Russian policy that is to be applauded is a policy that is supposed to serve the interests of other countries but (not) Russia."

So are Russia's dealings with Iran a matter of pure cash as you earlier suggested or a "strategic investment" against Sunni terrorism? I grant you that the "strategic investment" explanation transcends mere black and white, but it quickly passes complicated and nuanced to arrive at implausible.

Iran, the font of Shia terrorism, is not credible as an antidote to Sunni terrorism anymore than one may oppose automobiles by buying a Mercedes instead of a Toyota. And Russia's terrorist problem mostly arises out its botched approach to Chechnya and heavy handed Central Asian machinations, compromised security services, and political profiteering and provocations by Putin and his Chekist comrades.

Iran with A-bombs aided by Russian nuclear technology and reactor building does nothing to allay those follies or combat terrorism and raises up a host of new problems. With nuclear weapons, Iran will aim at expanding its influence through a toxic combination of terrorism and traditional power politics. That will harm the US, but with A bombs, Iran will be far more able to menace vulnerable, nearby Russia than the powerful, remote United States.

I am sure that there are Russian strategists who have considered this and looked to potential American responses against a nuclear armed Iran. Covert action and pressures designed to topple the regime are one option, but so also is a deal is which the Iranians give up terrorism and become a regional ally of the US, implicitly at the expense of Russian interests.

The best explanation for current Russian nuclear dealings with Iran is that the current government inherited them as a legacy from the Soviet era and persisted in them despited the changed national interest due to weak reasoning and bribery from the mullahs. That combination of Soviet legacy, bad national choices, and bribery is behind much of what Russia does today.