Russia and Its 'Failure' to Defend Allies It Doesn't Have

You can call Iran Russia’s ally all you like, but that doesn’t make it so.

Michael McFaul and Abbas Milani make a strange argument:

But over the past 20 months, Russia’s standing in the Middle East has cratered. Israel’s response to Hamas’s October 7 attacks has devastated the so-called axis of resistance, the Iranian-backed network with which Russia had forged close ties. The Assad regime in Syria, long a valuable Russian client, collapsed spectacularly. U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities severely weakened Russia’s most important regional ally. As a result, Russia’s reputation as a patron and guarantor of security in the region lies in tatters [bold mine-DL]. In the new Middle East now taking shape, Moscow is no longer needed.

It is true that Russia has not come to the aid of Iran and Iran’s regional allies, but except for the Syrian government none of them could be reasonably described as clients or allies of Russia. The authors call Iran “Russia’s most important regional ally,” but no such alliance exists. Iran and Russia have increased military cooperation in recent years, but Russia and Iran have made no security commitments to each other. Russia’s reputation as a “guarantor of security” couldn’t be affected by an attack on Iran because Russia never guaranteed their security. The labels used to describe relationships between other states matter, just as they matter when describing relationships between the U.S. and other states. Partners aren’t the same as allies, and we shouldn’t treat them as if they are all the same.