Russian President Vladimir Putin inspects a guard of honor during his official state visit to Astana, Kazakhstan, on May 28, 2026. The Iran War has largely confirmed President Putin’s view of the destabilizing nature of US foreign policy. (Shutterstock/Takeshisan)

How the Iran War Confirmed Russia’s Worst Fears About the US

Share this link on Facebook

Share this page on X (Twitter)

Share this link on LinkedIn

Share this page on Reddit

Email a link to this page

The Iran War has heightened Russian suspicions that the US seeks regime change in Moscow.

When the United States and Israel launched military strikes against Iran in February of this year, most Western attention naturally focused on the Middle East. Yet, the consequences of the conflict extend far beyond the region. In Moscow, the war sparked reactions among foreign policy analysts about what the conflict means for Russia’s own security and the war they are waging in Ukraine. 

How have the leading Russian foreign policy analysts interpreted the war in Iran? While it is hard to determine who is actually “influential” in Russian foreign policy decision-making aside from President Vladimir Putin, recent commentary by Fyodor Lukyanov (editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs), Dmitri Trenin, (a member of Russia’s foreign and defense policy council and former director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, with whom the author Andrew Kuchins worked from 2000 to 2007), and Ivan Timofeev (director general of the Russian International Affairs Council) provides some insight on the perspective from within the Russian political elite. 

Looking across their analyses, one conclusion stands out. The Iran War hasn’t produced a fundamental change in Russian strategic thinking. Instead, it has reinforced ideas that predate Putin’s presidency but have nonetheless become more prominent during his now 26-year tenure.  

Four themes are recurring. 

First, the conflict is seen as further evidence that international norms, the so-called “rules-based order,” have steadily lost their meaning. 

Second, it has strengthened the belief that Russia’s own network of strategic partners is becoming more cohesive under Western pressure.

Third, it has reinforced the perception that the Western alliance is politically less united than it appears.

Fourth, Russia itself could be vulnerable to the US predilection for regime change.

Together, these themes suggest that the Iran War has confirmed already existing strategic narratives and anxieties. In Russian eyes, the conflict provides evidence that Russia could be the next victim of a Western intervention.

The first and foremost theme is the belief that the international rules governing the use of force have steadily weakened. Russian analysts do not see the Iran War as an isolated event. Instead, they describe it as the latest step in a much longer process in which military power has gradually displaced international law as the main organizing principle of international politics. Lukyanov embraces this argument most explicitly. He argues that the Iran War shows Washington no longer feels the urge to seek international legitimacy for military action, marking a shift from at least formally respecting international law to the 19th-century logic of “might makes right.”

Earlier post-Cold War military interventions, starting with........

© The National Interest