Why Iran Prefers the Eastern Bloc Over the West

Photo: Hassan Rouhani of Iran, Vladimir Putin of Russia, and Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey

 

September 12, 2018

By Seyed Hossein Mousavian*

As the military phase of the Syrian conflict reaches its final stages, the leaders of Russia, Iran, and Turkey met in Tehran on September 9 and reiterated in a joint statement that a political solution to the Syrian conflict requires inclusive, free, and fair elections with the participation of all eligible Syrians under appropriate UN supervision.

They further reaffirmed their determination to cooperate to eliminate the Islamic State, the Nusra Front, al-Qaeda, and associated groups in Syria.

When the civil war in Syria began in 2011, the U.S.-led bloc and its regional allies, including Saudi Arabia, devoted their resources to removing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. However, as the result of Iranian-Russian cooperation to buttress the Assad’s government, they failed to achieve their goals.

The addition to this alliance of Turkey, which initially opposed Assad’s government, has further made it clear that President Assad has won the six-year war and will remain in power. If successful, the trilateral cooperation can play a more substantive role in managing other crises in the region.

Russo-Iranian relations were not always close. In fact, some of the bitterest eras of contemporary Iranian history were shaped by Russo-Iranians wars, after which Iran was forced to sign the humiliating treaties of Turkamanchay and Gulistan.

After the end of World War II as well, Soviet forces refused to leave Iran’s territory and began supporting separatist groups in Azerbaijan.

Unlike Russia however, Iran’s relations with the United States began friendly, and Americans were perceived as a benevolent power. Relations began to decline over six decades ago when a U.S. and U.K.–led coup removed Iran’s democratically elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh.

After the Islamic Revolution of 1979, the United States supported Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Iran and his use of chemical weapons against Iranian troops.

Originally published at lobelog.com

Ever since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, the foundation of Iran’s foreign policy has been “neither East nor West.” This implied that Iran would pursue an independent foreign policy.

However, hostile U.S. policies have created deep mistrust and pushed Iran further to the East. Recently, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei announced that he made a mistake by allowing the nuclear negotiations with the United States to take place.

His foreign policy advisor, Ali Akbar Velayati, also went on to call Trump “unreliable” but described Putin as “logical and brave.”

Iran’s mistrust of US is not unfounded. Forty-five American military bases with 130,000 soldiers are stationed near Iran. In addition, for the past 40 years, the United States has advocated for a regime change in Tehran and confronted Iran’s regional role, while trying to stop its economic progress, by enacting and enforcing economic sanctions.

Meanwhile, Russia, China, and India do not have an unfriendly military presence in the region. These countries consider Iran a political, economic, and security partner. They recognize that Iran plays an important role in fighting terrorists, and they have opposed the U.S.-led policy of regime change.

Iran’s relationship with China and India, the two major Eastern powers, has historical roots based on mutual respect and friendship. The Eastern bloc powers have been able to maintain a balanced relationship with Iran and its regional adversaries, especially Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE, while the United States only engages with Iran’s regional enemies.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, could have created a positive change after 40 years of hostile relations with the West. It was the first time the United States and Iran were officially negotiating at their highest diplomatic levels.

Over the past three years, Iran has fully implemented this agreement. Billed as the most comprehensive nuclear non-proliferation document, this agreement could have served as an opportunity for further discussions to resolve other regional issues.

In 2015, Ayatollah Khamenei said, “If the nuclear negotiations were to end without ‘ambiguity,’ it would be “an experience showing it’s possible to negotiate with them [the West] on other issues.” Instead, Trump accepted the recommendation of Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia, and made the United States the only side to leave the agreement.

This decision has only deepened the mistrust and killed any chance of further engagement.

At this stage, two elements will play a key role in the future of Iran’s relations with the Western and Eastern blocs.

First, Russia, China, and even Europe want to keep the JCPOA going. The problem for the Europeans is that they are vulnerable to secondary U.S. sanctions if they continue to do business with Iran. The powerful countries in the East, however, will use the vacuum that Trump created to advance their own relationship and unity with Iran.

Nevertheless, to maintain relations with the West, Tehran is weighing if Europe will be able to act independently and support the JCPOA without U.S. participation.

The second element concerns the possibility of direct U.S.-Iran negotiations under the Trump administration. Trump’s strategy is to destroy the JCPOA, pressure Iran through sanctions, and then try to reach a “better” deal with Iran. He has argued that Iran will reach out to him and ask for further negotiations.

Mahmoud Vaezi, President Rouhani’s chief of staff, responded by saying that Trump tried eight different times to speak with Rouhani. Nevertheless, Ayatollah Khamenei, who is the final arbiter of Iran’s foreign policy, recently stated that Iran will not negotiate with the United States at any level.

In my 30 years of service for the Iranian government since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, I have consistently witnessed that the U.S. policy of insulting, belittling, bullying, and coercing Iran has backfired.

It has only created a harder line within Iran, which will nullify any further negotiations with Washington. Although Iran’s relationship with the Eastern bloc improves as Iran’s relations with the Western bloc weakens, Trump and the United States—as well the JCPOA—will still play critical roles in Iran’s future.

The current trajectory of Trump’s policies will undermine the U.S.-led global order. U.S. sanctions against Russia, Iran, and Turkey will further increase the alignment of these countries as well as cooperation with eastern bloc powers such as China and India. Such a trend can lead to the end of the six-decade-long US hegemony in the region.

Originally published at lobelog.com


* Ambassador Seyed Hossein Mousavian is Middle East Security and Nuclear Policy Specialist at Princeton University and a former spokesperson for Iran’s nuclear negotiators. His nuclear book, The Iranian Nuclear Crisis: A Memoir, was published in 2012 by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. His latest book, “Iran and the United States: An Insider’s view on the Failed Past and the Road to Peace” was released in May 2014.

Photo credit: lobelog.com

One Response

Related Posts

Jan Oberg, TFF director April 9, 2026 I was recently invited to have a good, long talk about the world – and, of course, about peace too – with Boris Malagurski on his Weight of Chains Channel on YouTube. It was a real joy and seems to have been greatly appreciated by the viewers too. Mr Malagurski and I shall of course be grateful if you share this conversation in your circles – of course, only if you like what you see and hear 😉☮️ And remember that this one – like hundreds of others with TFF Associates – can be enjoyed at our TFF Video Collection.
A friendly quarrel while we agree that the US sanctions are a weapon of mass destruction and kill more people than wars do. And that we must talk much more about sanctions than we have so far. Jan Oberg, TFF director March 16, 2026 John Mearsheimer recently stated that U.S. sanctions murdered around 38 million people between 1971 and 2021 – see the video below. It is a dramatic figure, and it has spread quickly because it captures, in one sentence, the enormous human cost of modern sanctions. I share his concern about the destructive effects of economic coercion. But the specific number he cites — and the way he attributes it — deserves a friendly academic clarification. The figure comes from a 2023 Lancet Global Health article estimating the mortality effects of unilateral U.S. and EU sanctions over the past half‑century. This is the first point where Mearsheimer’s shorthand diverges from the text: the study...
This is not another geopolitical commentary on the Arctic. It is a visionary peace proposal that can save the region from militarised rivalry and ecological ruin. A blueprint for shared security, sustainable development, and human dignity — benefitting Greenland, the Arctic, and the rest of us. Jan Oberg TFF director Lund, Sweden, February 17, 2026 I. Four Principles for a New Arctic Vision The Arctic is often framed as a cold arena of rivalry — a place where great powers test each other’s resolve. But this worldview is outdated, unimaginative, and ultimately self‑defeating. The Arctic is not a vacuum waiting to be militarised; it is a living region, a climate stabiliser, and a cultural homeland whose future will shape the future of humanity. If we begin from that understanding, a far more rational Arctic order becomes possible — one that is peaceful, cooperative, and centred on the people who actually live there. This vision rests...

Recent Articles

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Read More
Living-Peace-Sign-Budapest-copy
Tony Robinson October 4, 2026 Violence is easy to recognise when someone is being beaten, shot or killed. It becomes more difficult when nobody is holding a weapon. Poverty, discrimination, exploitation and repression can restrict a human life just as effectively, although they do so in very different ways and with very different consequences. Simply adding more categories to an ever-growing list of forms of violence does not really solve the problem. The more interesting question is what all these different situations have in common and why it makes sense to describe them using the same word. Human beings do not simply react to what happens around them. They remember the past, imagine things that do not yet exist, make plans and undertake projects. Workers organise because they imagine different working conditions; people migrate because they imagine another life somewhere else; social movements emerge because people refuse to accept the...
b54a1f10-8c65-4f0b-9dd5-4abc0a7d04cc_2659x2659
It’s a matter of principles, courage, vision and pulling together – while the militarist world is falling apart… Peter Langille October 3, 2026 “Here, then, is the problem which we present to you, stark and dreadful and inescapable: Shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?”The Bertrand Russell—Albert Einstein Manifesto, July 9, 1955 ⁕ The forecast for what’s ahead is worrisome. The sharp rise in armed conflicts over the past three years is adding to what was already the highest level in over seventy years. Genocides, which should be prevented are supported. A shared climate emergency that jeopardises survival is ignored. Diverse polls now suggest that people are war-weary, worried and interested in a more effective United Nations. And, there are viable policy options for a more secure world! Yet governments are doubling-down, betting on more war and investing heavily. If current trends persist,...
010
Johan Galtung 1930-2024October 2015 Published here on October 3, 2026 Let us focus on Civilization for conflict analysis and remedies. Major forms of disorder use violence; war is state organized violence. The most belligerent states are the United States of America and Israel, both with civilization roots. National Evangelism, the US Protestant Christian civilization– more national than evangelical–justifies US warfare as exceptionalism of a people chosen by God, with a manifest destiny to run the world. Orthodox Judaism justifies Israeli warfare to conquer and expand from Nile to Euphrates as a religious right and duty to the Eternal One. The third most belligerent country, the UK, no longer believes it is God-chosen but chosen by the USA; not quite the same but something. But the root cause of global disorder lies in the Occident–with Islam–seeing itself as the single, universal civilization valid for all at all times, all others being...
Screenshot 2026-10-02 011738
Jan ObergPhD, director, The Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, TFFLund, Sweden October 2, 2026 This is my full original manuscript. The Chinese Academy of Social Science, CASS, makes two publications out if it. 1. China’s Five-year plan emphasized the capabilities of basic research and original innovation. It is regarded as the goal of the future social development, which, as required, should be significantly enhanced. Can you comment on the importance of original innovation in research and academic study? I believe it is easier to define “original innovation” in the natural sciences than in social sciences. The breaking points of what constitutes something new, or innovative, are not quite as sharp in the latter. But in both fields it is about opening up something that was closed, unseen, unexplored before – making manifest what was earlier latent. Innovations come in many forms and shapes – naming something that was not...
arctic-circle-map
The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...