By Aram Mirzaei for The Saker Blog
This article is partially written in response to The Saker’s analysis on the IRGC’s arrest of Russian journalist Iulia Iuzik. In his analysis, the Saker theorizes that the Ruasian journalist’s arrest could be due to one of two possible reasons:
– The Israeli visa stamp on her passport really infuriated somebody at the IRGC and that person acted impulsively
– This is the result of internal infighting in Iran
It would most likely be fair to say that it could be a combination of both. I know for a fact that Iranians view Russia very differently depending on who you’re asking. Even among the IRGC there are different factions that either view Moscow as a friendly country, who can help achieve Iran’s goals of kicking Washington out of West Asia, or they view Russia with suspicion and bitter memories of past grievances.
To understand these stances one must delve deep into the history of these countries and their relations over the past three centuries. Iran and Russia have a long history of animosity and differences, stretching back to the Caspian expeditions of the Rus. The most important conflicts were the ones between the Qajar dynasty and the Romanovs of Russia. Already during the southwards expansions of Pyotr I were Iran and Russia known to have sour relations. Pyotr’s forces quickly captured large parts of northern Iran and the entire Caucasus region as the crumbling Safavid Empire was quickly subdued. All the territory lost was later recaptured by Nader Shah, founder of the Afsharid Dynasty, one of the successor states to the fallen Safavid Empire. Following the advent of the Qajar dynasty, Western powers and Russia had begun a colonial race as the Qajar government was unable to confront these threats after the death of its founder Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar, who stabilized the nation and re-established Iranian suzerainty in the Caucasus. While the Portuguese, British, and Dutch competed for the south and southeast of Persia in the Persian Gulf, the Russian Empire largely was left unchallenged in the north as it plunged southward to establish dominance in Persia’s northern territories.
Iranians, even today bitterly remember the treaties of Gulistan and Turkmenchay. A weakened and bankrupted Qajar royal court, under Fath Ali Shah, was forced to sign the notorious Treaty of Gulistan in 1813 following the outcome of the Russo-Persian War (1804-1813), forcing Iran into ceding what is modern-day Dagestan, Georgia, and large parts of Azerbaijan. The Treaty of Turkmenchay (1828) was the outcome of the Russo-Persian War (1826-1828), which resulted in the loss of modern-day Armenia and the remainder of Azerbaijan, and granted Russia several highly beneficial capitulatory rights, after efforts and initial success by Abbas Mirza failed to ultimately secure Iran’s northern front. By these two treaties, Iran lost swaths of its integral territories that had made part of Iran for centuries. The area to the north of the Aras River, the land of fire, Azarpadegan, a land so closely connected to Iranian history was now forever lost.
Anti-Russian sentiment was so high in Iran during that time that uprisings in numerous cities were formed. With the Russian Empire advancing south in the course of two wars against Iran, and the subsequent signing of the aforementioned treaties, Iran lost its crucial foothold in central Asia and the Caucasus. By the end of the 19th century, the Russian Empire’s dominance became so obvious, that Tabriz, Qazvin, and a host of other cities were occupied by Russia, and the central government in Tehran was left with no power to even select its own ministers without the approval of the Anglo-Russian consulates. These, and a series of climaxing events such as the Russian shelling of Mashad’s Goharshad Mosque in 1911, and the shelling of the Iranian National Assembly by the Russian Colonel V. Liakhov, led to a surge in widespread anti-Russian sentiments across the nation.
By the time of the Russian revolution in 1917, with the formation of the Soviet Union, Russian involvement continued with the establishment of the short-lived Persian Socialist Soviet Republic in 1920, supported by Azeri and Caucasian Bolshevik leaders. After the fall of this republic, in late 1921, political and economic relations were renewed. During the 1920s, trade between the Soviet Union and Iran reached important levels. In 1921, Britain and the new Bolshevik government entered into an agreement that reversed the division of Iran made in 1907. The Bolsheviks returned all the territory back to Iran, and Iran once more had secured navigation rights on the Caspian Sea. This agreement to evacuate from Iran was made in the Russo-Persian Treaty of Friendship (1921), but the regaining of Iranian territory did not protect the Qajar Dynasty from a sudden coup d’état led by Colonel Reza Pahlavi.
The treaty of friendship wouldn’t last during Reza Shah Pahlavi as the Second World War started and the Soviet Union together with the United Kingdom launched an undeclared joint invasion of Iran, ignoring its plea of neutrality. After the end of the war, the Soviets supported two newly formed in Iran, the Azerbaijan People’s Government and the Republic of Mahabad, but both collapsed in the Iran crisis of 1946. This postwar confrontation brought the United States fully into Iran’s political arena and, with Cold War starting, the US quickly moved to convert Iran into an anti-communist ally.
After the fall of the monarchy, the Soviet Union was the first state to recognize the Islamic Republic of Iran, in February 1979. However, during the Iran–Iraq War, the Soviets supplied Saddam Hussein with large amounts of conventional arms. After the war, especially with the fall of the USSR, Tehran–Moscow relations experienced a sudden increase in diplomatic and commercial relations, and Iran soon even began purchasing weapons from Russia.
Yet despite the improved relations, Moscow partook in the UN sanctions on Iran with regards to Tehran’s Nuclear program. As late as 2010 Moscow voted for UNSC resolution 1929, Banned Iran from participating in any activities related to ballistic missiles, tightened the arms embargo, travel bans on individuals involved with the program, froze the funds and assets of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, and recommended that states inspect Iranian cargo, prohibit the servicing of Iranian vessels involved in prohibited activities, prevent the provision of financial services used for sensitive nuclear activities, closely watch Iranian individuals and entities when dealing with them, prohibit the opening of Iranian banks on their territory and prevent Iranian banks from entering into relationship with their banks if it might contribute to the nuclear program, and prevent financial institutions operating in their territory from opening offices and accounts in Iran.
This long history of animosity has only recently seen major improvements as Moscow and Tehran find themselves in similar situations in the face of Washington’s aggressive policies. After Moscow’s entry into the Syrian war, Tehran-Moscow relations deepened considerably as both countries coordinated and cooperated on the battlefield, with the shared goal of saving Syria.
Despite this, unfavorable views on Russia remain among some factions of the IRGC and the Iranian population on general. The faction among the IRGC mostly recognized as anti-Russian consists of mainly veterans from the war with Iraq. They have not forgotten the Soviet weapons used against them by Saddam’s forces.
This faction can be found among the Iranian Principalists (known as hardliners in the West), who stand in opposition to the Reformist Rouhani government. It was this faction that voiced protests against Moscow’s use of Iran’s Hamedan airbase, in 2017, as part of Moscow’s anti-ISIS operation in Syria. They argued that Moscow’s use of the airbase was in violation of Iran’s constitution which states that no foreign bases are allowed in Iran. The government countered with the argument that Moscow was only temporarily using the airbase, due to its shorter distance to Syria, but that control over the airbase remained in Iranian hands. It is believed that this faction among the IRGC is linked to Ahmadinejad’s political faction among the Principalist bloc. It would make sense since Ahmadinejad’s presidency coincided with a worsening in Tehran-Moscow relations as it was during his presidency that Iran was denied the purchase of the S-300 system by Moscow.
They believe that Russia cannot be trusted, and that Moscow is pursuing its own agenda in Syria. Moscow stands an Israeli ally who will side with the Zionists if and when the war with the Israeli regime breaks out. Moscow’s growing influence in the Syrian war is something that rather worries them instead of relieving them, as many of them believe that the Syrian war would eventually have been won without Russian interference, a view opposed by powerful figures such as Khamenei and the famous General Qassem Soleimani who favor a more pragmatic approach towards Moscow.
Due to the improved relations after 2015, Moscow and Tehran’s relations have expanded substantially to cover fields other than Syria. Moscow played an instrumental role in the negotiations of the JCPOA. Moscow has also stood by Iran on many occasions against US aggression. Moscow has grown especially popular among other IRGC factions, such as the Quds forces, led by General Qassem Soleimani. They have first-hand experience cooperating with Moscow in Syria. In general, many Iranians have also gained a favorable view of Russia. According to a December 2018 survey by IranPoll, 63.8% of Iranians have a favorable view of Russia, with 34.5% expressing an unfavorable view.
With regards to this, one can imagine that in the case of the Russian journalist, a sensitive thing such as an Israeli visa stamp on a passport can immediately give cause for suspicion of a Russian-Israeli plot among some circles in the IRGC. The Tehran-Moscow alliance is a fragile and a new one, and for the past few years, the nature of the relations between these two countries has only given us a glimpse of what the future of West Asia holds, only time will tell if the sceptics will be vindicated.
History is important . Yet, we have to think about advantages and disadvantages of history
for life , i.e. geo-political life. Russia and Iran are at the beginning of entirely new relationship .
So patience is needed to understand the future .
Let’s not to forget the co-operations of Russia and Britain to put grain embargo on Iran which resulted in the death of more than several million of Iranians by starvation.
Iran is entering a region that it never had expected–the EAEU, gateway to Eurasia/Belts and Roads, and India. So, guided by Russia as pathfinder, it has new markets, and will be a first tier member of the multi-polar unity, right next to China, India, Russia and the rest of the developing world.
Prosperity and growth for its very young population could be a pace-setter among nations for decades.
There are really “big fish to fry” if Tehran calculates along similar patterns to Putin and Xi.
One reason Israel is intensely scheming against Iran is it will eventually eclipse Israel in trade, invention, and status. It’s not just local hegemony and regional security. Iran has an enormous future. Israel is on a journey to nowhere.
Right, but instead of India rather Pakistan and Turkey.
India, except briefly under Mahatma Gandhi, was, and now certainly is (see e.g. Andre Vltchek’s essay about India) part of the AngloZionist West. Same goes for the leadership of the post-1953 Soviet Union, now Russia’s still very influential 5th column.
So what Aram Mirzaei clarifies makes perfect sense.
[by the way, Stalin’s Soviet Union needed buffer zones in order to survive the coming Western imperialist attacks (e.g. Barbarossa) which were sure to come]
Israel will continue to decay as a state and society so long as it is ruled by hatred, as personified by Bibi, the Talmudist fundamentalists and various secular fascistic and racist tendencies. There is room for an Israel, on 1947 boundaries, with all Palestinians exercising their Right of Return, but not for a racially exclusivist Eretz Yisrael of any size.
If the US was not led by half-wits and not so much in Israeli pockets, US-Iranian friendship and cooperation could have gone a long way, to the benefit of both parties, and perhaps world peace. Iran could have made clear that it would stay neutral vis-à-vis Russia and expected the Americans to be fair and non-interventionist in the ME. America would then have had access to oil from all in the ME: Saudi, Iran, and Iraq. Statesmanship and far-mindedness got replaced by stupidity and undue Israeli influence in the US leading to needless wars and problems.
The US is an Israeli colony.
Yeah but underneath that is the fact it is a British colony.
It is strange how a nation formed in 1948 (which 30+ nations still don’t recognize) has come around to basically controlling such a powerful nation as the USA. In a sense, Israel (via British Empire and Rothschilds, et al) was created then to recolonize, reclaim Britain’s former colony (colonies), the USA. Whatever the logistics, semantics, or what have you, this is an interesting take I hadn’t thought of before.
Whatever the case, Israel (ruling elitists of Israel, Zionist dual citizenry) pulled it off, did the deed. I like your analysis above, “One reason Israel is intensely scheming against Iran is it will eventually eclipse Israel in trade, invention, and status. It’s not just local hegemony and regional security. Iran has an enormous future. Israel is on a journey to nowhere.”
It’s all about the Bennys, baby, starting with Truman’s 1948 election campaign. OK, starting with the Federal Reserve in 1913.
you mean a satrapy.
Whether it’s Israel or Great Britain, the USA is a colony of the AngloZionist Empire, the parasite that feeds on it, as the Saker has written about, I guess? It’s been argued that both Israel and Great Britain are as well?
The concern may be that in the future, as the AngloZionist Empire continues to weaken, that the USA weakens with it, and becomes some type of formal colony, all over again, whether it’s Israel or Britain or another nation who capitalizes on that weakness to orchestrate and execute colonization.
In 2019, I think it’s important to note the prominence of Russia in this geographic region. In other words, the Kremlin would have to ‘sign off’ on any occupation of any part of North America, by anyone, if the AngloZionist Empire can’t hold on to its territory.
So long as Canada remains Canada, a constitutional monarchy of the British monarchy, Britain undoubtedly has some kind of significant established political presence. Translating that into a broader political presence (i.e. beyond the current Canadian borders) requires either extensive political collaboration with existing very powerful, entrenched, forces in America (even in a weakened host of the AZ empire) OR the unbreakable backstop of Russian military force. So far, Russia has used their military veto in very select circumstances.
Now might be a good time to pay closer attention to the comments from Russian officials about these kinds of dilemmas. :-)
Realistically, I think the only places for a political rearrangement, involving the British monarchy, may be along the Canadian border, where American citizens may (that’s a very tentative ‘may’) see the Canadian political arrangement with Britain as attractive — if Washington can no longer provide a central government.
You left out one adjective; arrogance.
The US of A is full of it.
When allied with intractable self-delusion it is a really poisonous brew.
One probably must delve much deeper (read Herodotus’ Historia for a start) than the last three centuries in order to have a clearer and more comprehensive picture of the relations between ‘Iran and Turan’, between Persia and the Hellenistic-Roman-Byzantine-Rus world (of what was called the ‘Hellenistic perimeter’), between Christianity and Islam.
The underlying assumption that the permanent ‘Russian aggression’ (equated with the ‘Crusaders’ and accused of ‘Zionism’) against the peaceful Muslim populations of the Caucasus is at the root of ‘animosities and differences’ cannot do. Neither would do a ‘popular’ sentiment that Russia’s policies in the ME must serve Iran’s geo-political and ideological objectives (removal of the “cancerous tumour in the heart of the Islamic world from the ‘landscape of geography’, Israel, whose existence, for good or worse, is part of the ‘international law’ sanctioned by the UNO) and that Russia ‘betrays’ the Iranians.
Russia is not in Syria either to prop any ‘Islamic revolution’, Iranian or Hezbollah (she is rather to keep it in check), or to prop a ‘Greater Israel’ or a neo-Ottoman ‘caliphate’. The ‘Islamic revolution’ in Iran was a ‘Western’ project and it was aimed at its exportation in the lands of the ‘Lesser Satan’ (USSR), had not the USSR cut them short by ‘invading’ Afghanistan. Hopefully cooler heads in Iran would prevail and understand that world politics are not driven by the Sunni-Shia childish contest of who should dominate the ‘ummah’ and and get out of their Islamic mental ghetto and let the adults to tackle the problems. And to understand that ‘Islam’ as such was a ‘zionist’ project from the get go. We should not allow ourselves to interpret history in Islamic key, let alone in ‘messianic-mahdist’ one.
I am cautiously optimistic.
Oh do please justify your assertion that the Iranian revolution was a western project. I have seen zero reason to believe such, and would welcome further education. Can you convince me you know what you are talking about?
The reason for this assertion is the fact that Ali Khamenei was imported from France (Paris) to be exact in order to take over the revolution. I can’t say more because I do not know the details.
Also, one thing to remember is that after the mid 1800’s France, England and Russia to lesser extend were muscling (hot conflicts) each other for control of Balkans and other territories under the Ottomans, which includes Persia (Iran today), Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Mesopotamia (Iraq today) and Arabian Peninsula (KSA and others). Those conflicts pretty well got settled around 1920-30. France and UK ended up carving out almost all of it.
To Anon. I’m not sure this mess of silliness even needs to be addressed, since it seems to come from some Zio troll and probably ignoring it is the best response.
1. The “Sunni-Shia childish contest” is a strategy of divide and conquer devised by the Israelis and funded by the Saudis. This “contest” was absolutely imposed upon Iran and the rest of the Muslim world, so the inference that it arose from the Iranians is simply not true.
2. It’s beyond ridiculous to say “The ‘Islamic revolution’ in Iran was a ‘Western’ project …”. Note that Khomenei’s personal journey to greatness began before the Cold War. Other than the fact that the French temporarily allowed Khomeni to stay in France for a matter of months, there are absolutely no fingerprints, no evidence or inference whatsoever, to think that the West had anything to do with starting this Islamic revolution, and the Imposed War 1980-88 was strong proof that the West worked very hard to strangle it in the cradle.
3. Any well-read Westerner knows that the USSR invasion of Afghanistan and the CIA’s war against in the 1980’s had very little impact on Iran, especially compared to the impact of the Imposed War, Iraq-Iran 1980’s.
My suggestion is to save enough money to pay the exit-visa from Israel, and to spend a few months around people who are not crazy paranoid. Get outside the mental ghetto which surrounds you, and go see what the world is like.
Those of us who have actually witnessed the revolution remember quiet well, how frantic the shah´s intelligence agencies and western intelligence outlets like bbc Persia tried to discredit Imam Khomeini. I remember my older brother coming home from a demonstration during the revolution and say to the point of crying: “He is an INDIAN!”. It is the oldest tactic in the intelligence book to accuse your enemy of being your collaborator. Some have even gone, where no intellectual has gone before and declared Imam Khomeini to be a Russian double ganger and the real Imam Khomeini having been Khashoggied somewhere by the Russians and replaced with a lookalike. Case in point the otherwise worthy Ralph Epperson PhD and his “The Unseen hand”!
Some hasbara here seems to favor the idea of some western entities helping Imam Khomeini to power. They probably have tried, otherwise they are dumber than they look! If the western intelligence have any brains, they will naturally try to influence antiwestern revolutions and revolts, as they have always done. There is after all not a new tactic. It is also historically a favorite tactic used to discredit the unaware victim! But where the western intellectuals fall short in their analysis is their lack of historical knowledge about the role of the shia clergy in Iran. Imam Khomeini is just one in a long line of clergymen, who have saved the Iranian people from destruction from internal and external forces being it the british or the americans. One only needs to look at the “Reuter treaty”, “The battle of tobacco” and Imam Khomeini´s fight against the “capitulation” to understand the leading role of the Shia clergy in the fight against the western imperialism from its conception going back for centuries. Any honest historian will tell you, that it was the shia clergy, who in the final analysiss brought down the british empire. The western populous has been brainwashed into accepting Gandhi as the father of what has become to be known as “passive resistance”. But the truth of the matter is, that Gandhi was a dilatant, a liar and a usurper, who did not have the decency to tell people, that he only copied and repeated the strategy, that had already been used successfully against the british empire and the east india company by Grand Ayatollah Shirazi! No wonder, in the end Gandhi was blinded by the glitter of the west and sold his soul for fame at the altar of his own ego. No doubt he himself knew, that telling the truth would have meant an end to all the invitations to all the places the errandboy Gandhi would never be otherwise invited to. Imagine Gandhi saying, that he only repeated, what an ayatollah did in Iran!
While Gandhi was being invited to western colonial capitals to talk about his fight against them, Ayatollah Shirazi began to cry, when they gave him the news of his victory against the british empire. And when people ask, why he was crying, he replied, that from that moment the british have learned, who their enemy was!
Ayatollah Shirazi was told about the british east india compay and their desire to colonize Iran after their successful colonization of India. While the british had used salt monopoly in India, they wanted to use tobco monopoly in order to colonize the country and had already sent about 100 000 british agents to Iran. Ayatollah Shirazi openly declared, that the british were trying to colonize the country using tobacco. He even expressed concern regarding introduction of western usurious banking system in the country. He decided to declare a Fatwa proclaiming, that any use of tobacco from that moment was HARAM (forbidden). It is known by almost all Iranians today, that when Grand Ayatollah Shirazi declared his fatwa the servants of the shah broke his water pipes and did not allow the shah of the country smoke tobacco.
The Iranians had done the impossible and had stopped the colonization of Iran without firing a single shot. Gandhi repeat, what Ayatollah Shirazi had done in Iran but never gave him credit for the salvation of India. Who knows maybe the hindu would have burned him to ashes for following a Shia Grand Ayatollah!
But if you are an American indian, you should look at the Reuter treaty, whenever you fell blue and like to curse your forefathers for their stupidity. You wouldn’t believe what our idiot kings gave away! You will have a laugh. And again it was the Khomeini of his time, who saved us from the west. We owe everything we have and we are to the Ayatollahs of our every time!
I could not agree more, Cosimo. Inciting Sunni-Shia sectarian hatred is specifically mentioned in the Oded Yinon Plan as a prime mechanism to be exploited to split the Middle Eastern states into powerless statelets. And then there is the doenmeh genocide-cult, Wahhabism, which hates everyone but other Wahhabists-is it any wonder that Israel and Sordid Barbaria are such good, if discreet, allies?
Maybe not so far fetched. The Iranian revolution seemed to inspire in Brzezinski and co. the instigation of a “green revolution” in the ME and Central Asia. This was even felt in Turkey with the advent of religious fundamentalist types like Turgut Ozal (a former WB employee who introduced neoliberalism to Turkey)
The objective was to contain and reverse “leftist” socialist ideologies and replace them with religious fundamentalist ideologies, apparently, because theocratic ideologies make it easier to control the masses, as well as introduce a rapacious form of capitalism into countries. Theocracies are not necessarily economic in ideological outlook.
The theocratic ideology was intended to replace socialist ideology. The US certainly pursued this in the 80s+. We can still see this appraoch in the US and the West today.
Normally it does not make sense thinking that the imperialists did fund their future arch-enemies. But considering their arrogance and ignorance unlogical events become understandable. Before the Russian revolution German officers went with white flags to Russian positions bringing bolshevik propaganda in order to weaken Russian defence. The German generals didn’t know what they were dealing with. Solving one tactical problem by making a huge strategical problem. Given the ignorance of the “leaders” one cannot exclude their possible mistaking Khomeini with some reactionary theocrati in the early stages of the Iranian revolution. After all, that was how the Iranian revolution was portraited in the West a long time, partially even now.
Ulrich, not only that. Germany was verifyably training and “advising – commanding” Turkish forces. All the Turkish atrocities and genocides were committed under the advise and command of German officers. Keep in mind that Turkey (Ottomans earlier) was a always Germany’s ally. You could say that Germans were polishing off their genocidal skills in early 1900’s.
The USA used Islamic and Wahhabist fundamentalists to destroy Arab nationalism and socialism since the alliance between the USA and Sordid Barbaria in the 1940s and the CIA coup against Mossadegh in Iran in 1953.
It should be noted that both the 2010 anti-Iranian sanctions vote and the “cancelled” S300 order both happened under president Medvedev, while Vladimir Putin was serving as Prime Minister. He also approved NATO’s “no-fly zone” in Libya in 2011, which made him look like a gullible fool.
Wow…some wild historical revisionism here…I will call attention to some of the inaccuracies, but the bottom line is that this commentary illustrates that there is a deep divide between the Iranian and Russian people, and that Iran cannot be counted as a reliable partner, much less an ally…
The historical big picture is that Persia and the Ottoman Empire have had centuries of war and conflict…surpassing by far the total of four wars with Russia on Persia’s periphery [the first being quite minor anyway, and initiated by Iran to boot]…
But it is abundantly clear from this narrative that revanchism is very much alive in the Iranian consciousness…
This is quite amazing…the territories ‘lost’ consist mostly of Christian Armenia and Georgia…which had certainly never been ‘integral’ to Muslim Persia…but were in fact grabbed back and forth between the Iranians and Turks over their many wars in the preceding several centuries…
But let’s look at how that war started and unfolded…it was in fact the Persians, under British tutelage that started the war…by invading Russia
So Persia invaded and lost…Russia gained Armenia and most of the Caucasus…do Iranian now feel that Christian Armenia rightfully belongs to them…?
In the previous war of 1804 to 1813…the issue was mostly about Christian Georgia, which had been under the yoke of Muslim Ottomans and Persians, back and forth for centuries…and whose King had asked to be incorporated into the Russian Empire…
Here the perfidious Persians allied with Napoleon, who had invaded Russia herself, intending to conquer absolutely…which Russians remember as the Patriotic War, exceeded only by The Great Patriotic War against the Nazi invaders in the following century…
So we see a pattern of Iran as aggressive regional hegemon, subduing foreign peoples and cultures as it was able…fighting mostly the Ottoman Turks for this imperialist loot…and crucially allying with the historical enemies of Russia throughout…the French invaders, then the British…
This is in fact what Iran would do today if it had the opportunity…ally with the west against Russia…just as they did during the rule of the Shah when Iranians and their US patrons flew repeatedly into Soviet airspace [and were of course repelled, although not without loss of Russian life]…I won’t get into the details here, but most Russians certainly remember these provocations…
As for the Iran-Iraq war, the author conveniently neglects to mention that…
As for Russia’s alleged ‘support’ of Iraq…well…there was also the US [chiefly] French, China and financial support from the Gulf Monarchies…
The author also throws arrows about Russia’s withholding of arms sales to Iran in the last decade…while underplaying the central role of Russia in helping to secure the JCPOA and the crucial assistance to Iran’s nuclear energy program…both of which Russia guaranteed to the Iran-hostile international community with its own good word…
[The nuclear plant built and supplied by Russia is not even mentioned here…]
As for Israel…there are over a million Russians living there and the government naturally has a right to protect all Russians…
Most ordinary Russians are in fact concerned about Iran’s bellicosity toward same…Russia [along with China] are the only world powers still holding up the world’s dangerously teetering legal order, as embodied by the UN Security Council…
There can be no talk of anything other than Israel withdrawing from the occupied territories as per the UNSC resolutions…but Iran insists on a maximalist position that is not in line with supreme international law…nor with Russian diplomacy…
This dangerous lack of diplomatic maturity on the part of Iran is cause enough for Russia to be very careful how it handles the Islamic Republic…
It is good to have friends of course, but the question for the Russian world is…can Iran ever really be a friend…?
This incident of detaining a Russian citizen is rightly viewed by most Russians in the same way as the abuses that we see towards Russians on US soil…
It is unacceptable…and this ‘explanation,’ appealing as it does to a fake history and irredentism is hardly going to impress anyone with an objective and informed view…
Worth remembering the barbaric slaughter of the Russian Ambassador Alexander Griboyedov (the noted writer) and his staff in 1829 by a fanatical ‘angry mob’ incited by the mullahs and the Mojtahed Mirza Masih Astarabadi (and British agents) because he sheltered two Armenian women and an Armenian eunuch escaped from the harem of the Shah’s son in law. The motivation was that he ‘insulted the Muslims’ by ‘taking a number of Christian women, who had converted to Islam, to the Mission’ and ‘that freeing Muslim women from the claws of unbelievers is allowed’. Of course, the Russian government demanded severe punishment of those responsible, but as Russia was engaged in a new war with the Ottomans, did nottake further measures. The Shah rushed to make amends and to mollify the Tsar he gifted him the ‘Shah Diamond’.
It’s good that you draw attention to the war of 1804-1813, when Russia was simultaneously at war with France, the Ottoman Empire, Sweden and Great Britain. The Persians declared jihad in 1810, at a moment when the Ottomans were severely beaten in the war of 1806-1812, coming to the rescue of the Ottomans. The defeat of the Turks would have been greater, had not the imminent Napoleonic invasion forced the Russians to conclude the Peace of Bucharest in May 1812 and retreat their troops for the defense of Russia.
Hold your horses and don’t do us any favors fb. The Russia that only “yesterday” voted in favor of every inhumane colonial resolution put forth by the west has it´s own barbaric recent history, not 2 hundreds years ago but just a few years back. Ask the entire Eastern Europe!
When I was a little boy, my mother didn´t read H. C. Andersen to me, but told me about “the great hunger” instigated by the british and the Russians, that killed 9 000 000 iranians. For years I used have nightmares about it as a child. We don´t forget the crime of killing 9 000 000 of us!
Keep your JCPOA, which in fact nothing but just yet another tragic Turkmanchay curtesy of a bahai president dressed in shia clergy Rouhani, a known spy of the british MI6! And with regards to the Russian people´s concerns about Iran, it looks like the indigenous people in the heart of the amazon share the same concerns too! I wonder why and how! And thank you for mentioning the Bushehr powerplant, finally finished by the Russians after years of playing shameful S300 games and delays, actually longer! Buying a powerplant from Russia again would be a disgrace to the Iranina people. Funny though the Russians finally gave us the S300 when faced with billions of dollars in fines to the Iranian people!
Anybody following global events will tell you, that Russia has a loose morality when it comes to Russian interests and steadfastness towards its allies. Obviously you make the case for it in your defense of arms sales to Saddam. We on the other hand have paid for our support of the oppressed people in the region not only with our blood but alos 4 decades of crippling sanction. It is true, really we are the aggressors saving Palestinians from 2 million Russians, who have colonized another people´s country. We are the aggressors saving Bagdad and Mosul from falling. We are the aggressor preventing Damascus from falling. We are the aggressor helping the yemenies, while the Russians sanction them, while the Saudis are committing genocide against them. We are the aggressors helping Venezuela. If only all aggressors did as we do. Shame on Russia for having all the bombs and not the balls!
Poor little Russians remembering how airplanes entered into their airspace and where replled, while even the Syrians have to pay the price for the soviet Russians colonial wet dreams with civil war in 2019!
You seem to be under the impression, that being Russia’s friend should give them the right to spy on ou people on behalf of the Zionists. Well with friends like Russia, who needs a 5.column! And when it comes to diplomatic maturity we have managed to stand tall against the entire western world with their threats of war, sanctions and intelligence agencies working day and night for 40 years and we are still the forerunners of the anti imperialist and anti zionist struggle in the world. Russians don’t have the balls!
Russia is not an ally of Iran, therefore it cannot be accused of ‘lack of steadfastness towards its allies’.
Neither the Russians, nor the British ‘instigated’ the famine of 1917-19. The death toll did not exceed 2 million people, mostly due to cholera and typhus epidemics, as well as to the worldwide influenza pandemic (the Spanish flu) of 1918-20. But Iranians must have their ‘Holodomor’.
One of the oldest tactics of the propagandists has always been to comment on something and say anything against what they consider to be against their interests. It doesn´t matter whether it is true or not. The point is to give the reader an alternative and a choice. The reader then chooses according to his or her cultural and political knowledge base also known as Hermeneutics, which is also provided by the propagandist machinery in the media. The idea is that even the most obvious of truth can be naturalized using doubt. This tactic is being use every single day with regards to any tragedy by the zionist media.
Lucky for us the statistics are there to prove, that out of 20 000 000 iranians 9 000 000 were deliberately killed by the british and the russians. But it is true, that most of the killing was done by the british, who did absolutely every thing possible to make sure the highest number of casualties possible. naturally the hasbara is using the readers existing knowledge about past but resent tragedies and attribute the killing to influenza! or cholera! It takes a special kind of a person to do muster that amount of inhumanity!
whether we are allies with Russia or not, it is inevitable in the future. The level of cooperation in Syria has be unprecedented for both countries. The tragedy is, that the russians have not learned from their history and the soviet defeat. There are many reasons for the soviet defeat, but in the final analysis the reason for their defeat was, that they did not have allies but only vassals, which broke the back of the proverbial camel. Maybe one day they learn, that powerful allies are much better for Russia than weak vassals!
Why would the Russians and the British ‘deliberately’ kill them?
Why would the british throw indigenous people of Australia off the cliff? Why would the romans poison the wells after their defeat? Why would the americans kill millions of indians? Why would they use nuclear bombs, when the japanese had surrendered? Why would americans order every single man killed in Philippines? Why would churchill start two world wars? Why do they commit genocide after genocide? Maybe because they can! Maybe it is a lesson! Maybe it makes it easier to break a people! Maybe they just want revenge! Maybe They just destroy an entire nation and beautiful souls like Lumumba, because he called a murderous king a murderer!
OK, but why Russians? Russia’s policy was directed rather to counter the British. The Great Game, heard of it?
On the one hand, the greatest beneficiaries of all the concessions granted by the Shah and his corrupt courtiers were Jews (Reuter Concession – opposed both by the Russian and British Governments at the time, the Imperial Bank, Banque des Prêts/Bānk-e esteqrāżī). On the other “Taken as a whole, Persian concessions encouraged foreign trade, commercialization of agriculture, contacts with the West, and gradual incorporation of the country into the world economy” (as they have to admit).
“Why would the Russians and the British ‘deliberately’ kill them?”
Is that a bad joke ?
Do you see what happen in Yemen ?
What hapened in Libya ?
And the Irak embargo few years ago ?
Where is/was Russia and others ?
Yes that is called deliberate killing of people.
Destruction of countries for imperialist gain.
Propaganda make WWII Germany the big vilain.
But Russian and Anglo have always been butchers no better that Germany.
And truth be told the Anglo are the worst genocidal imperialistic civilization that has ever existed on earth with the adequate bodycount.
Funny though how the colonial powers try to even belittle the victories of the victims by giving them worthless names. We call it “The battle of tobacco”, because it was a battle for the survival of our people. But the british call “demonstration”. They call taking over the country concession, as if it was done willingly and not without the entire force of the british empire behind it. We call it colonialism!
You seem Anon to be an avid wikipedia user, so I will give you a hint with regards to the russians: The russian revolution!
I don´t know how many of you Anonymous there are here at this site, but if it you alone playing all these parts, then you know better. What you call trade, others call colonialism. Don´t you know, that the british colonial powers built bridges and roads and railways too! How else could they transport their loot to the sea! Maybe when they blockades the sea, while iranians were dying like flies was an agricultural development!
Would you say that cultivation of tobacco was ‘agricultural development’? We are told day in, day out that tobacco is the most harmful drug and the most severe measures are demanded to restrict its free consumption and production.
thanks for really informative article about Russia and Iran – and their history – I’m not surprised that Iran doesn’t trust Russia after all the information on the betrayal of Iran by Russia – even Putin himself. Wow – I didn’t know that. And I side with Iran on the Israeli visa thing too – after all – Iran represents all of the people worldwide that are in the truth about Israel. Its sickening that Russia and Putin ignore the atrocities on Palestine. Sickening. Thanks Iran – for being on the right side of history in most every case. I hope though – that the political figures in Iran – Rouhani and Zarif become history too…I don’t trust them.
Hi Aram – silly me, I couldn’t find the original article by Saker that you’re referring to – could you share the link ?