Connect with us

Russia

Patrushev urges assertive Russian naval presence to counter NATO encirclement strategy

Published

on

Nikolai Patrushev, Assistant to the President of the Russian Federation and Chairman of the Maritime Board, has outlined a sweeping strategic vision for Russia’s global naval power while issuing sharp warnings to NATO, the Baltic states, and European governments.

In an extensive interview with Ivan Yegorov of the state-run newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta, the former Director of the Federal Security Service (FSB) also disclosed previously classified operational details from his tenure heading the domestic intelligence agency and shared personal family histories from World War II.

Speaking ahead of the 85th anniversary of the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, Patrushev emphasized the geopolitical imperative of preserving historical memory as a geopolitical shield.

“The Great Patriotic War is the cornerstone of our national historical memory and an inseparable part of our culture,” Patrushev said. “In Russia, regardless of nationality, it is impossible to imagine a normal citizen who does not hold the memory of the war sacred. Fighting uncompromisingly to preserve this memory is everyone’s duty. This is the most effective antidote against the new wars being fomented on earth today.”

Patrushev criticized Western societies for what he characterized as a profound ignorance of history. “If people in the West knew the history of the Second World War deeply enough and learned the full truth about the atrocities of Hitlerism, they would shrink back in horror from their governments, which today support neo-Nazism,” he said.

He asserted that during World War II, the proportion of Nazi collaborators in Europe far outnumbered those in active resistance movements, describing this as an established historical fact.

“This is not an assertion, but a fact accepted by European historians,” Patrushev said. “In France, with a population of 40 million, approximately 3.5 million people served the occupiers. I emphasize: they did not merely sympathize; they directly and actively served. In contrast, the number of participants in the French Resistance was around 250,000. These figures are not even comparable. Indeed, the last defenders of the Reichstag were French SS soldiers.”

Evaluating France’s post-war status, Patrushev added: “Nevertheless, France was included among the victorious allied nations and obtained a seat on the United Nations Security Council due to the anti-fascist movement of the Allies and the personal respect that Joseph Stalin himself held for General Charles de Gaulle.”

“Descendants of those who besieged Leningrad are now aiding Kyiv”

Turning to the German occupation of the British Channel Islands, Patrushev stated: “There, such an agreement was reached between the British and the Germans that British police patrolled alongside German soldiers. However, many ordinary residents of the islands acted more courageously than the British authorities, hiding Soviet prisoners of war, whom the Germans had brought for forced labor, in their homes.”

Patrushev emphasized that, in his view, the whole of Europe consciously waged war against the Soviet Union.

“Nearly half of the SS divisions were formed from elements coming from Italy, Romania, Hungary, Finland, Slovakia, France, Croatia, Spain, Denmark, the Netherlands, and other countries,” he said. “Eleven states participated in the siege of my hometown, Leningrad. Alongside Germans and Finns, Italians, Norwegians, Spaniards, Romanians, Belgians, Dutch, and those from the Baltic countries attempted to destroy the people of Leningrad. Now, their descendants are hypocritically aiding Kyiv in attacking St. Petersburg with unmanned aerial vehicles.”

He dismissed the historical neutrality of certain European states as “merely formal.”

“The Swedes provided strategic raw materials and industrial products to the Germans; the Portuguese sold tungsten,” Patrushev said. “The neutrality of Switzerland is an entirely different matter. Gold bars melted down from the jewelry and gold teeth of prisoners murdered in concentration camps are still stored in the vaults of Swiss banks. Meanwhile, Irish Prime Minister Eamon de Valera went to the German embassy in May 1945 to offer his condolences following the death of Hitler.”

Patrushev characterized the decisions of Finnish leader Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim and King Michael I of Romania to withdraw their countries from the Axis alliance as strictly pragmatic, forced steps.

“Mannerheim and Michael made forced decisions to switch to the side of the Soviet Union when Soviet troops reached the borders of their countries,” Patrushev said. “On our territory, the Finns acted in a more bloodthirsty manner than the Germans. Despite this, the Soviet Union showed magnanimity; the political regime in Finland was preserved, and the King of Romania was honored with the Order of Victory, the highest military decoration of the Soviet Union. Of course, the steps of these leaders were not sincere repentance, but pragmatic decisions. Yet, it must be acknowledged that they chose the path of saving their countries from complete destruction. Today’s Europeans need to learn at least common sense from them.”

“Watching Baltic states pull the whiskers of a cat with nuclear claws”

When asked whether similar pragmatic leaders would emerge in contemporary Europe, Patrushev warned of potential catastrophe.

“Either these leaders will be found, or Europe will be dragged into a disaster,” he replied. “For now, events are developing according to the second scenario, and some European countries are practically unable to sit still. It may be a somewhat crude expression, but when I watch the mice in the Baltic states pulling the whiskers of a cat that has nuclear claws, this is precisely the impression I get.”

Patrushev described aggressive statements from Lithuanian officials regarding the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad as the work of “pathologically troubled people.”

“It is clear that Lithuanian politicians want to drag the whole of Europe into this adventure,” Patrushev warned. “However, they cannot fail to understand that in the event of an attack, Lithuania’s peaceful, carefree life and sovereignty will come to an end first. Nevertheless, the Vilnius administration is deliberately pouring oil on the fire.”

Patrushev noted that he maintains contact with several childhood friends living in Lithuania. “I meet with my friends, and they all say with one voice that their own government does not represent national interests, but is instead rapidly turning the country into a colony of Brussels.”

Asserting that ordinary Europeans do not harbor hatred toward Russia, Patrushev urged the Baltic populations to study their own history.

“Europeans, especially the British, are the founders of racism,” Patrushev said. “The first racists did not consider the Baltic peoples to be human beings and practiced hatred against them. Do you think something has changed today? A graduate of Eton College in Britain will never view an Estonian or a Latvian as an equal.”

“Rescuing our brothers under neo-Nazi occupation in Ukraine”

Patrushev accused modern Europe of participating in the destruction of the Slavic population by backing Ukrainian forces, whom he characterized as neo-Nazis. “In fact, European neo-Nazis are making every effort to create a kind of Fourth Reich out of the European Union,” he said, adding that the deaths of children in Ukraine under the current administration remain a stain on the conscience of their Western supporters.

Describing the humanitarian situation in Ukraine as critical, Patrushev said:

“As part of the special military operation, we are also fighting for the future of the Ukrainian people. The Ukrainian population has literally been brought to the brink of survival. Half of the country has been turned into a massive barracks, and the other half into a concentration camp. The population has fallen from 52 million to 22 million. The majority of Ukrainians do not want to fight and do not view Russia as an enemy, but they have no right to make their voices heard. Neo-Nazi groups supported by London and Brussels keep the population in fear and completely control Zelenskyy. Today, we are fulfilling the mission of saving our brothers who have come under neo-Nazi occupation in Ukraine. Of course, the heirs of Goebbels habitually turn everything upside down, telling tales that Moscow has supposedly occupied Ukraine.”

Patrushev rejected historical assertions that the Soviet Union occupied Eastern Europe, arguing instead that the USSR brought peace and stability to the region. He claimed that many countries within the socialist bloc enjoyed higher living standards than the Soviet Union itself and built modern industries with Soviet assistance.

Addressing Western criticism of Soviet military interventions in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968, Patrushev said: “The Soviet Union resorted to force only in response to terror. In Hungary, angry crowds were tearing their own citizens apart in the streets. In Czechoslovakia, any loss of life among the civilian population was prevented. By contrast, I have not heard a single word of thanks from the West for the fact that the Soviet Union voluntarily permitted the reunification of Germany without bloodshed and without demanding any reparations.”

“We must be under the enemy’s nose without waiting for NATO ships”

Turning to Russia’s geopolitical position in a multipolar world, Patrushev emphasized maritime strength as a prerequisite for great-power status.

“In the world, there will be as many poles as there are great maritime powers,” Patrushev said. “If we want Russia to remain a great power and a true center of power, we must strengthen our positions on the seas. The experience of recent years shows that the security of maritime trade and our maritime borders is a primary condition for our country’s prosperity and stability. I believe that Russia will always be a great maritime power.”

Patrushev highlighted Russia’s unique geography as a critical asset. “Russia is the largest country in the world by surface area. However, we cannot develop and protect these vast territories without securing strong positions on the seas, developing distant maritime routes, and ensuring robust cabotage and inland waterway transport. Russia simultaneously faces the Atlantic, the Arctic, and the Pacific Oceans. We also open up to the Indian Ocean via the Caspian Sea and the North-South corridor, which is currently being developed. No other country in the world possesses this unique geography. Therefore, we can and must be a bridge in maritime trade between four oceans.”

He recalled that during World War II, the Soviet Baltic and Black Sea fleets were blockaded, but argued that strategic defeat was averted due to the sacrifices of Soviet sailors.

To prevent the Baltic Fleet from facing a similar containment strategy today, Patrushev called for an active maritime posture.

“Western strategists have analyzed the experience of world wars well and hope to pin our fleet back to its bases again, blockading it and forcing it to break through this blockade at the cost of heavy losses. This must not be allowed to happen again. The Baltic and Black Seas carry the main volume of our maritime trade. We have indications that the West is working not only on blockade scenarios but also on preemptive strike scenarios against our bases. Therefore, it is extremely important for the navy to be combat-ready and capable of combating threats such as mines, unmanned vehicles, and cyberattacks. We are detecting and neutralizing magnetic mines placed under some merchant ships arriving at our ports. We suspect these mines were attached in European ports.”

Patrushev advocated for an assertive naval doctrine based on historical precedents.

“Our navy, through its training and determination, must seize the initiative and impose its will on adversaries on opposing shores,” Patrushev said. “Remember the famous testament of Admiral Ushakov: ‘Close range to the enemy is the best tactical method.’ We must not wait for NATO ships, aircraft, and unmanned vehicles to arrive at our borders. On the contrary, we ourselves must be located right under the potential enemy’s nose. A good example of this was when our navy escorted merchant ships in the English Channel, off the coast of Britain. At that time, no British ship or aircraft dared to obstruct our convoy.”

To project Russia’s historical maritime role globally, Patrushev announced that the Maritime Humanitarian Research Center had been established within the Russian State University for the Humanities by presidential decree.

He described the Northern Sea Route as the product of a century of national effort, while acknowledging the contributions of foreign sailors who delivered aid to the Soviet Union via Arctic convoys.

“In 2017, when a monument in memory of the Arctic convoy sailors was unveiled in Iceland, our family was invited,” Patrushev said. “My brother Viktor and his wife Tatyana traveled to the capital, Reykjavik, where they were received with great respect. A few kilometers north of the Icelandic capital, in Hvalfjörður, where the allies formed their convoys, stands a monument called the Hope of Peace.”

Patrushev shared that World War II left deep scars on his own family. During the siege of Leningrad, his infant sister, Larisa, died of starvation.

His mother, Antonina Nikolayevna, served as a nurse during the Soviet-Finnish War and World War II, treating wounded soldiers in the hospitals of the 23rd Army, for which she was awarded the Order of the Patriotic War, Second Class, and four medals.

His father, Platon Ignatyevich, served as an officer on destroyers and warships in the Baltic and Northern fleets, participating in convoy escorts. He was awarded the Order of the Patriotic War, First Class, and two Orders of the Red Star.

His father, who retired with the rank of Captain First Class, miraculously survived the sinking of the destroyer Deyatelny, which was torpedoed by a German submarine near the end of the war. Patrushev noted that his own decision to study shipbuilding engineering was heavily influenced by these family ties and his father’s career.

After graduating from the Leningrad Shipbuilding Institute, which Patrushev described as offering world-class instruction, he worked in a specialized design bureau developing projects for Soviet military intelligence.

“In the nineties, Russia was indeed on the verge of collapse”

Reflecting on his career in Soviet and Russian intelligence, particularly during the 1990s, Patrushev described the post-Soviet transition as exceptionally perilous.

“The West was preparing to feast on the ruins of our country,” Patrushev said. “They believed that following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia would also disintegrate. They decided to achieve this using the forces of international terrorism. In all the positions I held, I had to fight this threat first and foremost.”

Patrushev accused Western intelligence services of systematic interference in Russian internal affairs during that era.

“They financed thousands of non-governmental organizations, media outlets, provocateurs, and outright traitors; they rewrote history and attempted to pit brotherly peoples, especially Slavs, against one another,” he said. “They aimed to divide and destroy not just the country, but the entire Russian world. We had to exert truly colossal efforts to preserve Russia. In the nineties, Russia was indeed on the verge of collapse.”

Regarding his decoration as a Hero of the Russian Federation by President Boris Yeltsin in 1999, Patrushev remarked: “I view this high award as an acknowledgment of the massive contribution made by thousands of my colleagues to preserve the existence, state structure, and territorial integrity of our country.”

Patrushev recalled that the counter-terrorism campaign in the North Caucasus entered its active phase in 1999, asserting that Western powers backed militants seeking to fragment Russia.

As Director of the FSB, Patrushev said he received real-time intelligence reports identifying the locations of militant training camps, their financial pipelines, and the names of dozens of European intelligence officers supplying weapons to the insurgents.

By 2001, coordination of the counter-terrorism operations in the region was fully transferred to the FSB.

Citing the operation to clear Gudermes of militants, Patrushev said: “Military officials at the time proposed a direct assault on the city, but in the end, our plan was accepted. The city was cleared of terrorists without a single shot being fired, preventing heavy casualties and saving the city from destruction.”

He stated that intelligence operations and negotiation efforts led several key figures, including the Yamadayev brothers, to lay down their arms and join the federal forces. Patrushev praised the role of the late Mufti of Chechnya, Akhmad Kadyrov, in ending the conflict, adding that Kadyrov had raised his son, Ramzan Kadyrov, to be a patriot.

Patrushev also highlighted the role of the FSB Special Purpose Center in operations that neutralized high-profile militant commanders, including Aslan Maskhadov, Arbi Barayev, Shamil Basayev, and Khattab, as well as the capture of Salman Raduyev.

Addressing criticisms surrounding the response to the 2002 Moscow theater hostage crisis, Patrushev said:

“Yes, there should have been no loss of life. Of course, the situation was extremely complex. The terrorists had penetrated almost to the center of our country; they were well-armed and had received instructions from their Western handlers to carry out maximum acts of terror to create instability and execute a coup in Russia. We immediately established an operational headquarters, and I reported every step to the President. We located a building in Moscow with a layout similar to the theater building and conducted hostage rescue rehearsals there with Special Purpose Center units. Following these preparations, the operation was launched. The operation was successfully executed, and the terrorists were neutralized before they could detonate any bombs. However, lives were lost. While the FSB units worked with extreme professionalism, there was a lack of similar coordination among other agencies. After the terrorists were neutralized, the rescue teams tasked with assisting the hostages failed to coordinate as they entered the hall. Consequently, panic ensued, and the antidote could not be administered to everyone in time, while some hostages received a double dose. This is why the casualties occurred.”

Patrushev added that necessary lessons were drawn from the tragedy, noting that the Ministry of Emergency Situations, currently led by Aleksandr Kurenkov, operates with significantly higher professionalism today.

Concluding the interview, Patrushev summarized his core personal philosophy: “In every post, I believe one must be useful to one’s country and people. We must preserve the memory of our great history and look to the future. In building the future, we must care for the new generations and pass on our experience to them. The greatest happiness is for young people to choose maritime professions and, through this path, acquire love for the motherland. The greatest spiritual value of the Russian person has always been love for the motherland.”

Russia

Valdai Forum debates superpower survival amid global anarchy

Published

on

The survival strategies of superpowers were addressed at a meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club held in Russia.

Speaking at a session titled “Geopolitical Re-division: Power as a Guarantee of Peace or a Pledge of War”, John Mearsheimer, Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, argued that the best way for superpowers such as Russia, China, and the US to sustain their existence under conditions of international anarchy is to increase their military and economic power.

During the session, Mearsheimer drew attention to the fact that the fundamental priority for every state is survival.

Stating that there is no higher authority in the international system, Mearsheimer made the following assessment:

“Every state wants to survive, because survival is the number one goal. Let me conclude by returning to my main point: never forget that you operate under conditions of international anarchy, meaning there is no ultimate authority. The moment you recognise this reality, you realise that the best way to survive is to maximise your relative power. The concept of relative power is synonymous with the balance of power. If there is a great power in the system, the balance of power assumes immense importance; because power is the key to survival.”

Expressing that only three true great powers exist in the world, Mearsheimer listed these countries as the US, China, and Russia.

Stating that India is not included in this category because it lacks sufficient economic wealth despite its massive population, the professor noted that a large population and substantial economic resources form the foundation of military power.

Stating that the competition between the US and China continues not only in the military sphere but also in the field of technology, Mearsheimer emphasized that the race in artificial intelligence and other advanced technologies determines both wealth and military capacity in today’s world.

Dmitriy Trenin, Research Supervisor at the Institute of World Military Economics and Strategy at the Higher School of Economics (HSE) and President of the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), also stated during the discussion that Russia must preserve its great power identity, otherwise it will not be able to survive.

Pointing to the question of whether the US can maintain its global leadership, Trenin said that the future of all humanity could depend on this balance.

Expressing that the concepts of power and survival carry a distinctive relationship, Trenin conveyed that theories in Western political science do not fully align with the reality in Russia. Touching upon his country’s past, Trenin said, “Russia faced an existential survival risk twice in less than 100 years. The state collapsed first in 1917, and then in 1991. There is no guarantee that it will not collapse once more.”

Trenin recalled that although the Soviet military was at the peak of its power in 1991, this military might failed to save the USSR from dissolving.

Emphasizing that might does not consist solely of military force, Trenin brought up lines by the poet Aleksandr Pushkin depicting the struggle between gold and steel.

Trenin also cited the saying, “A donkey laden with gold can conquer any fortress.” The Russian analyst concluded that the country’s survival depends on Russia’s own internal dynamics and domestic condition, rather than on relations established with other states.

Alastair Crooke, a British diplomat and founding director of the non-governmental organisation Conflicts Forum, argued at the session that military force constitutes only one dimension of influence.

Citing the Palestinians as an example, Crooke expressed that the people sacrifice their lives for the sake of their own civilisational idea, way of life, and worldview.

The diplomat stated that even without substantial military power, Palestinians rally support in their struggles for sovereignty by relying on different elements of power, rather than merely on the number of tanks, money, or fighter jets.

Stating that a system of a “concert of powers” reflecting a compromise between civilisations could emerge in the future, Crooke expressed that in this order, states would preserve their sovereignty and would not abandon their own native civilisations.

The British diplomat said that old international structures, including the existing United Nations mechanism, must definitely be transformed.

Earlier, an analysis in Politico reported that US President Donald Trump sought to develop relations with Russia in order to prevent the construction of a Beijing-led global order.

Trump, for his part, expressed that Washington and Beijing could achieve great things together, and described President Xi Jinping as a “great leader” following his official visit to China.

Zheng Yongnian, Dean of the School of Public Policy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, emphasized that despite its relative decline, the US maintains its global hegemony, and that underestimating Washington would produce a fatal mistake.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also characterised China as the greatest geopolitical challenge for his country, but noted that relations with Beijing constitute one of the most critical portfolios for Washington.

Continue Reading

Russia

Mearsheimer says Trump seeks Ukraine peace but lacks diplomacy skills

Published

on

Simultaneously with contacts conducted by US President Donald Trump’s representatives Steven Witkoff and Jared Kushner, a delegation of prominent American political scientists visited Moscow.

Professor John Mearsheimer, a faculty member at the University of Chicago who took part in the delegation, answered questions from the Russian daily Kommersant on the sidelines of a round-table meeting jointly organised by the Russian Council on Foreign and Defence Policy and the Higher School of Economics.

Mearsheimer said that while the Washington administration possesses the potential to play a constructive role in ending the war in Ukraine, it has not yet translated this capacity into action.

Stating that an American effort to encourage the Kyiv administration to reach a compromise with Russia and halt the war would make a positive contribution, the political scientist said: “Having potential is one thing, realising it is another matter. In this sense, the US has not yet used its potential and has not taken noteworthy steps that would contribute to ending the war in Ukraine.”

Evaluating Trump’s dispatch of negotiators Witkoff and Kushner to Moscow and Kyiv over the weekend, Mearsheimer emphasised that the American president is maintaining his efforts.

Recalling that the representatives had previously travelled to the Russian capital, the professor offered the following assessment:

“Trump is striving to achieve progress. The fact that he sent Witkoff and Kushner back to both capitals, despite having failed in the past, shows that he has not abandoned this objective. Yet at this stage, I see no concrete reason to believe these initiatives will succeed. There is no ground to think that Witkoff and Kushner have developed a magic formula that will end the war in Ukraine.”

Mearsheimer also addressed the motivation underlying Trump’s desire to end the conflict. Stating that the US president definitely wants to stop the war, the political scientist noted that Trump wants to be recognised as a peacemaker and receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

Arguing that Trump, who regards ending the war as serving American interests, is inexperienced in diplomacy, Mearsheimer remarked: “He does not know how to resolve this extremely complex problem. When his novice diplomacy combines with an issue of such intricacy, it is not surprising that he cannot make progress.”

Stating that although Trump previously described the conflict frequently as “Biden’s war”, the present picture shares out responsibility, Mearsheimer said that the conflict has now become Trump’s war.

Pointing out that the US administration continues weapons supplies via Europe, intelligence sharing including for strikes targeting Russian territory, and satellite internet support, the political scientist said:

“Before Trump returned to the White House in January 2025, this was Biden’s war. But when he became US president and could not end the war, this conflict turned into his own war. It is clear that the US continues its support by providing direct intelligence and indirectly giving the Europeans weapons to be transferred to Ukraine. Therefore, the US, and President Trump in particular, continue to provide support to Ukraine and contribute to the continuation of the war.”

Continue Reading

Russia

Russia aids Iran in covert supersonic cruise missile project, FT says

Published

on

According to a report by the Financial Times (FT), Russia is assisting Iran in developing advanced supersonic cruise missiles through a covert programme.

The multi-year secret collaboration, described as one of the most comprehensive strategic military technology transfers between Moscow and Tehran, reportedly bears the codename “C430L”.

Based on an examination of leaked correspondence, travel records, and military patents, the report stated that the programme, which began in 2023, continued during the war waged against Iran by the US and Israel.

Under the programme, experienced Russian missile specialists were reported to have supported Iran in developing a new class of weapons capable of threatening US aircraft carriers and warships in the Middle East.

Ramjet technology aimed at breaching air defence systems

According to the report, the primary objective of the C430L programme is to assist Iran in developing a ramjet propulsion system that enables a cruise missile to fly at several times the speed of sound.

Military experts point out that the technology in question is designed for use in anti-ship and land-attack cruise missiles.

Fabian Hinz, an expert at the UK-based arms monitoring group Conflict Armament Research, emphasised that this strategic transfer, which the Iranians have sought to obtain for decades, would require approval at the highest political level in Russia.

Jim Lamson, an expert at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies and a former CIA analyst, stated that this system would provide Iran with a new strategic weapon capable of threatening US naval assets.

Supersonic cruise missiles combine high speed with low-altitude flight capabilities, narrowing the time available for advanced air defence systems to detect and intercept the missile. This represents a strategic advantage for the Tehran government along the Persian Gulf line, where the US and its regional allies possess land- and sea-based defence systems.

The report noted that while Iran had built the ramjet system and conducted flight tests, there was no concrete evidence that a Russian-backed supersonic missile had yet been deployed in the field.

State enterprises and chief engineers involved

The supersonic missile assistance programme is reportedly coordinated by Russia’s state-owned arms export company Rosoboronexport, with the project being executed alongside NPO Mashinostroyenia.

NPO Mashinostroyenia, which was placed on the US sanctions list in 2014, is known for its work on cruise missile systems launched from ships, submarines, and land platforms, as well as Russia’s nuclear forces comprising intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Leaked travel records show that senior Russian engineers and export officials travelled to Iran multiple times before a contract was signed with Iran’s Ministry of Defence and Armed Forces Logistics in November 2023.

These figures include Aleksandr Dergachev, chief designer of naval missiles at NPO Mashinostroyenia; Aleksander Chebakov, a ramjet specialist; Yuri Prokhorchuk, head of the aerodynamics department; and Vladislav Kuzmichev, head of the Defence Technologies and Space Department at Rosoboronexport.

The documents indicate that by 2025, the company had received extensive Iranian technical materials regarding the ramjet propulsion system, analysed telemetry data obtained from a flight test, and submitted detailed queries to Tehran on topics including the fuel system, combustion stability, and the air intake.

In April 2025, Rosoboronexport proposed sending a delegation of around twenty experts to Iran for technical consultations.

Military cooperation between the two countries deepens

The programme is regarded as part of a deepening military partnership between Tehran and Moscow. Iran had previously supplied Shahed-type armed unmanned aerial vehicles used by Russia in the Ukraine war and assisted in their production within Russia.

Western officials also accuse Russia of providing satellite imagery and weapon components to Iran during the ongoing hostilities with the US and Israel.

The report recalled that Russian President Vladimir Putin, during his meeting with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian in Kyrgyzstan, said Moscow was “striving to provide the necessary aid and goods in this difficult period”.

Nicole Grajewski of Sciences Po University in Paris stated that the covert ramjet programme demonstrated “Russia’s effort to widen the war in Ukraine and draw the US to different fronts”, noting that Moscow no longer attached as much importance to regional red lines as it once did.

Leaked correspondence reveals that the C430L programme continued into 2026, with the parties continuing to negotiate technical reports and the next phase of the development process.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey