Russia’s Mediation in Iran’s Nuclear File

By Masoud Sadrmohammadi

With the confirmation that Donald Trump will serve a new term as the President of the United States, Iran’s analytical landscape swiftly shifted toward assessing the implications of Trump’s maximum pressure policy against Iran. Politicians, analysts, and ordinary citizens alike focused on the potential impact of the anticipated hardline approach that his administration could adopt toward Tehran.

However, as Trump settled into the White House, it became evident that the pace of international developments would far exceed initial expectations. Naturally, Iran’s case, as a key regional issue in the Middle East, was no exception to this rapid evolution of geopolitical dynamics.

While the early days of Trump’s return saw analytical discussions centered on the reconfiguration of bilateral relations between Iran and the U.S., a significant shift in focus emerged following an extensive conversation between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin on February 12, 2025, and the first official meeting between U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Riyadh. These developments suddenly redirected attention to Russia’s role in shaping the political equations between Tehran and Washington.

Further reinforcing this notion was Lavrov’s visit to Tehran on February 25, which signaled Russia’s active involvement in the Iran-U.S. file. Adding to this, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated that Moscow was prepared to mediate and facilitate de-escalation between Tehran and Washington. This proposal was raised following the late February meeting between the Russian and American foreign ministers in Riyadh. Notably, Europe, in contrast to its previously prominent role in the 2015 nuclear negotiations, has been sidelined from this process. According to Russia’s TASS news agency, Peskov stated, “We believe dialogue is the only solution, and we are ready to assist.”

These diplomatic developments swiftly transformed the analytical discourse in Iran. Alongside discussions on how to engage with Trump’s administration, a new focal point emerged: Russia’s positioning toward Iran. Predictably, certain factions within Iran’s reformist camp—historically critical of Moscow—seized the moment to accuse Russia of betraying Iran. According to their perspective, Russia has allegedly opted to scale back its support for Tehran in exchange for significant concessions on the Ukrainian front, thereby pressuring Iran to reconcile with the United States.

The Status of Iran’s Nuclear Case and the Necessity of a Mediator’s Intervention

As the ten-year period of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) approaches its expiration in October 2025, the possibility of Iran’s nuclear file being referred back to the UN Security Council and the activation of the snapback mechanism against Tehran has become increasingly tangible. The reality is that Iran is not in a favorable political position. Adding to this precarious situation are Trump’s maximalist demands and, more critically, Israel’s escalatory policies, which have further exacerbated Iran’s diplomatic challenges.

From Israel’s perspective, Iran is now in a weakened and vulnerable state due to multiple regional developments: the diminishing power of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah in Palestine and Lebanon; the potential collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria; and growing political pressure on resistance groups in Iraq. Additionally, Israel’s terrorist operations inside Iran have demonstrated the significant penetration of its intelligence networks within the country. Against this backdrop, Israel is leveraging its influence over the pro-Israel lobby in the White House to push Trump’s maximum pressure policy beyond economic and political coercion toward the option of a military strike against Iran’s nuclear, military, and infrastructural facilities.

While Trump occasionally raises the prospect of negotiations with Iran, he simultaneously imposes excessively restrictive conditions, particularly concerning Iran’s missile capabilities. This approach has effectively led to a diplomatic deadlock. However, a diplomatic stalemate does not necessarily indicate that the U.S. is prepared for military action against Iran. The potential costs of war remain a significant deterrent, as highlighted by Qatari Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani in a frank discussion with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. He warned that a military conflict with Iran could render the entire Persian Gulf region uninhabitable. Additionally, global energy security remains fragile, and any heavy blows inflicted by Iran on Israel would further destabilize Tel Aviv’s already precarious position. Given these considerations, despite Israel’s persistent efforts, an outright war with Iran remains an undesirable option for Trump.

In such a diplomatic deadlock, the involvement of political mediators becomes an inevitable course of action. Previously, the European Union—primarily Germany, the United Kingdom, and France—played this mediatory role in nuclear negotiations. However, Europe’s handling of the nuclear issue and its demonstrated lack of independence led to deep Iranian mistrust and disillusionment. Furthermore, the Ukraine conflict and Europe’s security concerns have significantly diminished the EU’s political weight. Simultaneously, Iran’s nuclear case has lost its priority on the European diplomatic agenda.

Against this backdrop, Russia has now stepped forward as a mediator and begun diplomatic maneuvers concerning Iran’s nuclear file.

Potential Options for a Deal

Russia’s proposal for nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States has not yet been officially disclosed. However, based on the rhetoric of Russian officials and the elements currently on the table, its broad contours can be discerned.

The primary leverage of the United States against Iran remains its stringent sanctions, while Iran’s most significant bargaining chip is its high-level uranium enrichment. It appears that Russia, in its initial steps, aims to moderate the behavior of both actors by leveraging these two factors.

If the U.S. agrees to ease its most severe sanctions against Iran and provides a credible guarantee that neither it nor Israel will launch a military strike on Iranian territory, there is a possibility that Tehran might reconsider both the level and volume of its uranium enrichment activities. Additionally, Iran could suspend certain technical projects that have raised international concerns regarding its potential pursuit of nuclear weapons capability.

Another focal point of Russia’s diplomatic efforts may be ensuring that the United States refrains from introducing or supporting aggressive resolutions against Iran at the UN Security Council. Furthermore, Washington’s alignment with Russia’s diplomatic approach within the Council could serve as another key component of Moscow’s mediation strategy.

Russia’s Gains from Mediating in Iran’s Nuclear File

According to Middle East Monitor, a Russian official confirmed: “We can convey messages and provide a platform for negotiations.” This initiative is primarily an effort to fill the diplomatic vacuum left after the deadlock of the Vienna negotiations. Beyond that, it signals Moscow’s broader attempt to sustain and expand its role in the Middle East. Russia’s deepening ties with Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, alongside its continued close relations with Tehran, reflect this strategic maneuver. These efforts can be interpreted as steps toward shaping the global political landscape in the post-Ukraine war era. By playing a constructive role in preventing an international crisis in the Middle East, Russia seeks to bolster its global standing.

Moscow’s mediation in Iran’s nuclear file also serves to break its international isolation. Russia could leverage its role in these talks as a bargaining chip in negotiations over Ukraine. However, beyond immediate geopolitical calculations, Moscow is pursuing a long-term strategy of balancing its geopolitical weight against Europe by deepening its influence in the Middle East.

Moreover, the easing of sanctions on Iran would naturally lead to an expansion of trade between Tehran and Moscow, creating mutual economic benefits. From Russia’s perspective, this not only offers economic gains but also helps mitigate the impact of Western sanctions. In other words, Russia benefits from this mediation as a means to bypass and reduce the effectiveness of sanctions imposed by the West.

Obstacles to Russia’s Success in Mediating Iran’s Nuclear File

While the greatest advantage for Russia in its mediation efforts between Iran and the U.S. is the deadlock in which both parties find themselves, several significant obstacles could hinder Moscow’s success.

The primary challenge is Israel’s ongoing efforts to escalate the crisis and push for military action against Iran. The pro-Israel lobby in Washington remains the most serious threat to Russia’s initiative, as it actively works to deepen tensions and steer U.S. policy toward confrontation rather than diplomacy.

Another major hurdle is the slow decision-making process within Iran’s political system, compounded by divergent political perspectives on engagement with the United States. Some political factions in Iran benefit from the continuation of hostilities with Washington and view any attempt at de-escalation as a betrayal of the Islamic Revolution’s principles. This internal resistance could complicate Russia’s efforts to broker a diplomatic settlement.

A further challenge comes from the deep-seated distrust of Russia among certain political groups in Iran. These factions—predominantly reformists—often use their media platforms to portray Moscow’s actions as acts of betrayal against Tehran. While remaining largely silent on U.S. and Western pressures on Iran, they consistently frame Russia and China as potential threats that could undermine Iranian interests. This narrative, amplified through media channels, could shape public perception and affect the level of support Russia’s mediation efforts receive within Iranian political circles.

Another obstacle to Russia’s success is the potential shifts in Washington’s political priorities. Trump’s unpredictable and often disruptive approach to international affairs makes it difficult to establish a stable framework for negotiations. Rapid changes in the White House’s foreign policy agenda could diminish the relevance of Russia’s mediation efforts, reducing its ability to sustain a meaningful diplomatic role in the Iran-U.S. nuclear negotiations.