It is worth paying attention to the fact that the Treaty refers to a comprehensive partnership. This indicates that there are many non-public elements in addition to those points and articles that are openly stated and signed by Russian and Iranian Presidents Vladimir Putin and Massoud Pezeshkian following their talks in the Kremlin.

The Comprehensive Partnership includes everything that is openly mentioned in the Treaty, implying diplomatic, economic, cultural and social ties as well as what is not said. The Treaty declares industrial and military cooperation, but there are also non-public aspects that make the strategic alliance between Russia and Iran truly comprehensive.

The most important element is cooperation that turns Iran into a full-fledged military ally of Russia. A Eurasian military-strategic bloc of sovereign and powerful states is forming before our eyes, which not only summarizes but multiplies their potentials. First of all, we are talking about the “nuclear umbrella”—Russia’s nuclear support for Iran in case Iran finds itself in a state of military conflict. At the same time, it is probably assumed that Iran will give Russia the opportunity to deploy military bases on the territory of the Indian Ocean, thus realizing Russia’s long-standing strategic goal of access to warm seas, to the ocean.

For this purpose, endless Russian-Turkish and Russian-Persian wars took place throughout history. Today Russia has a unique historical chance to achieve this most important geopolitical goal—integration along the meridian, along the North-South axis. And Russia can do it finally without wars, aggression, colonization and loss of human lives—through alliance and friendship.

The North-South transport corridor plays a crucial role, on the one hand connecting Iran with the vast territory of northeastern Eurasia, on the other hand opening opportunities for Russia to export and import various goods, to receive strategically important high-tech tools and systems through Iran.

Both countries under Western sanctions have strengthened their positions. The multiplication of potentials brings the Russian-Iranian bloc to a new level, turning it into a powerful global force. Given Iran’s influence on the Shiite world (Iraq, Syria, Hezbollah, Shiites), a Russian-Shiite alliance is being formed, expanding the zone of strategic potential.

The conclusion of the treaty is a timely step on the eve of Trump’s inauguration. Russia will have to enter into a dialog and possibly make some agreements with the new U.S. administration. To be fully armed, it was important to find ways to significantly strengthen our capabilities.

China is an important partner and friend of Russia, providing substantial support. However, China is a separate story, and it would hardly go for a comprehensive strategic partnership that implies a full pooling of capabilities with Russia. Nevertheless, an alliance with China is Russia’s trump card that strengthens Russia’s position. But with Iran, Russia can achieve even more. The Russian-Shiite axis can fundamentally change the geopolitical situation in many regions.

Multipolar World: Russia and Iran as an Example of Complementary Regimes

In the contemporary political landscape, as in historical practice, different types of political relations can be distinguished. Politicians can take different positions, ranging from enemies to opponents, as well as neutral forces or allies. However, there are states and ideological regimes that have a clear complementarity to each other.

An example of such complementarity is the relationship between Russia and Iran. There are no contradictions of any kind between the two countries. In both Russia and Iran there are traditional values as well as a common rejection of Western hegemony and globalization. These aspects are at the core of the policies, worldviews and sovereignty of both nations.

China is certainly an important partner for Russia, but its involvement in globalization poses certain challenges for the further development of relations with Russia. The Chinese economy is deeply integrated into the Western market, which makes it difficult to talk about closeness with this country in the same way as with Iran. The Islamic Republic of Iran is in a completely different situation: it is much closer to Russia in terms of geopolitical, political, ideological and worldview aspects.

Thus, subtle distinctions need to be made in foreign policy. Politics is not a linear process; there are indeed friends, but there are also allies and partners, interests and values. Russia and Iran have interests and values that are as close as possible.

Eurasian Military Bloc: Prospects and Geopolitical Realities

In the context of the formation of the Eurasian Russian-Iranian military bloc, the question arises as to what extent the world is really divided into military alliances. In fact, it is already divided, it is just that it does not have an official designation. There is an opinion that if a Eurasian military bloc is created with the presence of NATO, we may face constant competition between these structures, which increases the likelihood of conflicts and clashes. However, in my opinion, this is not the case.

The weakness, fragmentation, separation and isolation of individual states can only serve as a provocation for stronger alliances and blocs, encouraging them to attack, subjugate and establish direct control. Thus, it is important to utilize all available options to ensure sovereignty, and the creation of a military bloc seems to be an effective way of preserving it.

The need for strategic access to warm seas, which has already been discussed, can be met through such a military bloc. In turn, Iran needs certain technologies, including nuclear ones. In this context, Russia could become an important ally for Iran, by providing it with a nuclear umbrella, which could prove to be a guarantee of the very existence of the country itself.
Moreover, the NATO bloc exists. Perhaps in the future this bloc will be divided into American and European parts.

At the moment, the countries of the world are more and more striving to create military blocs rather than to dissolve them. A negative example is the unilateral dissolution of the Russian military bloc, the Warsaw Pact, after which NATO only grew stronger and included many countries that Russia had abandoned.

Consequently, the stronger and deeper the military-strategic relations with other sovereign powers, the greater the guarantees of stability and peace. Weakness and fragmentation in international politics are not arguments; on the contrary, they can be a provocation for more powerful military and political forces.

Thus, if there is something that cannot defend itself in the face of a serious threat—and such a threat today is the Western NATO bloc—it becomes a potential victim of de-sovereignization, a victim of invasion and external governance. To preserve independence, a close political-military bloc and partnership with Iran is necessary as one step toward enhancing security and maintaining sovereignty.

Source