• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Alexey Arbatov"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Iranian Proliferation"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Middle East",
    "Iran",
    "Russia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Imagining Russia, Iran, and the United States If the Nuclear Talks Fail

If the nuclear talks fail, further Russian cooperation on coercing Iran is not likely while Russia and the West remain locked in a standoff over Ukraine. Moreover, Russia and Iran may move to build closer relations in the future.

Link Copied
By Alexey Arbatov
Published on Mar 3, 2015

Source: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs’ Iran Matters

As the final deadlines for the nuclear negotiations with Iran approach, more consideration should be turned to the aftermath of the possible failure of the talks to produce a workable agreement. An important consideration for American officials for the day after the failure of the negotiations is how Russia will adjust its policy to the post-Geneva world, which will probably see a return to confrontation between Iran and the United States.

Russia will probably not accept some form of ultimatum where Iran must meet certain benchmarks or new sanctions will be imposed. Moscow will be more likely to accept a step-by-step approach, involving Iran implementing increased transparency measures, agreeing to certain levels of enrichment, or restrictions on the Arak reactor in exchange for sanctions relief. Further Russian actions to coerce Iran are unlikely. However, even with this flexibility, an agreement is unlikely at this point.

In the event that the negotiations fail, it is doubtful that Russia will consent to future sanctions against Iran. For Russia, applying sanctions against Iran while being the subject of sanctions of the US and EU would be quite a Kafka-ian policy. It is more likely that Russia will increase unilateral cooperation with Iran. A recent example of this shift in direction came in late February, with the news that Russia has offered to sell Iran its advanced Antey-2500v anti-aircraft missiles, which could be used by Iran to defend against Israeli or American attack on its nuclear sites. While this would harm Russia-US relations, it is hard to imagine how the relationship could get worse at this point. As long as the crisis in Ukraine remains ongoing and Russia remains pressured by the US and EU in this area, its cooperation will not be forthcoming.

There is virtually no possibility under President Obama of the United States launching a military strike to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities. At the same time, it is unrealistic to believe that a comprehensive agreement will be reached under the current circumstances. With this in mind, it is critical that American policymakers begin considering their plans for the day after the talks fail, and consider what role Russia will play in America’s Iran strategy going forward.

This article originally appeared on the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs’ Iran Matters.

About the Author

Alexey Arbatov

Alexey Arbatov is the head of the Center for International Security at the Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations.

Alexey Arbatov

Alexey Arbatov is the head of the Center for International Security at the Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations.

Alexey Arbatov
SecurityForeign PolicyNuclear PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesMiddle EastIranRussia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Trump and MBS walking through a doorway
    Commentary
    Emissary
    What We Know About the U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Deal

    Despite the agreement’s uncertainty, it’s still a significant development in regional and nuclear policy.

      • Andrew Leber
      • Jane Darby Menton

      Andrew Leber, Jane Darby Menton

  • Trump and Xi standing next to each other
    Commentary
    Emissary
    A Path Forward on AI Safety for the United States and China

    “AI safety in parallel” is modest and pragmatic but vital.

      Matt Sheehan

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Why Europe Must Take Charge of its Russia Diplomacy Now

    Trump is distracted and Ukraine wants Europe to step up. The continent’s leaders must find their voice and assert it in talks with Russia.

      Alissa de Carbonnel

  • Supporters of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party wave German flags at a campaign rally in front of the Berlin City Hall on June 29, 2026.
    Paper
    The Alternative für Deutschland and Germany’s Unsettled Place in the World

    Unresolved tensions within the AfD may ultimately constrain the its potential as a leader among European and global populist forces.

      Jeremy Cliffe

  •  Delegation staff members meet in the lobby during a quadrilateral meeting between the U.S., Iran, Pakistan, and Qatar at the Lake Lucerne Summit, aimed at advancing a deal to end the Middle East conflict at the Buergenstock Resort, Lake Lucerne on June 21, 2026 near Stansstad, Switzerland.
    Paper
    Negotiating an Age of Conquest: Converting American Power Into Durable Political Outcomes

    There is a deeply rooted assumption in post–Cold War American statecraft that overwhelming military and economic power translates directly into favorable political outcomes. But force alone is rarely enough. To meet the challenges of the mid-21st century, Washington needs a cultural shift toward a mindset that takes negotiation far more seriously.

      • Cecily Brewer

      Cecily Brewer

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.