Putin: A US attack on Iran will be considered an attack on Russia
posted at 12:30 pm on October 26, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | regular view
Vlad isn’t directly quoted saying that in the Asia Times’ article. Here’s how it reads.
The barely reported highlight of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to Tehran for the Caspian Sea summit last week was a key face-to-face meeting with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
A high-level diplomatic source in Tehran tells Asia Times Online that essentially Putin and the Supreme Leader have agreed on a plan to nullify the George W Bush administration’s relentless drive towards launching a preemptive attack, perhaps a tactical nuclear strike, against Iran. An American attack on Iran will be viewed by Moscow as an attack on Russia.
Again, no quote, but if that’s Putin’s policy then, needless to say, it complicates and circumscribes US options quite a bit. It turns a pre-emptive strike that we could probably conduct without any casualties on our side into a tripwire for a very serious war. Which is one reason that I’m leaning toward thinking that it’s not actually Putin’s policy. It may be what he told the Iranians, I don’t doubt that very much, but if the B2s actually struck Iranian reactors, it’s hard to imagine Putin actually going to war with us over it. Though I concede that it’s not impossible to imagine that. That’s the whole point of the threat, to keep us off balance.
Putin seems to be playing a double game with respect to Iran, positioning Russia to be somewhat closer to Iran than the US but not yet an open enemy of the US. He has also shown some signs of dragging his feet on actually delivering hardware to the Iranians. But he also has also denied that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons at all and announced a kind of Caspian Sea version of the Monroe Doctrine aimed very obviously at keeping US influence and maneuvers in the region to a minimum. He’s clearly using the situation to bring the Kremlin’s influence back to its old Soviet glory days, at the expense of the safety of the world.
The article goes on to discuss some of the politics in the background that are influencing who does and says what regarding Iran’s nuclear policy and negotiations. Allah covered quite a bit of that yesterday in this post. Suffice it to say that the ground is shifting a bit in Tehran, or at least appears to be.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
We had our shot, and we missed it.
see-dubya on October 26, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Putin is risking an awful lot if he thinks a nuclear armed Iran is not a threat to Russia.
GogglesPisano on October 26, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Riiiight. Aren’t they confusing a conventional strike on their tactical nukes with a tactical nuke strike?
TexasDan on October 26, 2007 at 12:35 PM
It is also worth remembering, though, that Russia too had lost blood over civilian casualties due to terrorism. She maybe playing a dangerous game, and from our point of view a frustrating one, but the bear is not blind.
Spirit of 1776 on October 26, 2007 at 12:37 PM
It’s BS. I say we call his bluff.
warriorlawyer on October 26, 2007 at 12:37 PM
This kind of move by Putin really makes me wonder what he expects out of Bush in the next year and, less so, whom he expects to see take office afterwards.
MadisonConservative on October 26, 2007 at 12:37 PM
I think we have no choice but to call Putin’s bluff. Our military objectives are not determined by Russia. They tried this once before when JFK was in office, it didn’t work for them.
Maxx on October 26, 2007 at 12:39 PM
simple political math….look at what the American left is willing to trade away because some tin pot dictator might get a bomb….we have thousands…America will be our doormat.
Limerick on October 26, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Putin needs to get his pee-pee smacked pretty hard. He’s puffing and posturing and aiming to turn Russia back into the superpower that it once was by opposing the US in every way he can. Bush ought to take a few steps to show him that it isn’t going to work. Putin will not go to war with the US over a reactor in Iran, and everybody knows it. Call his bluff.
morganfrost on October 26, 2007 at 12:40 PM
Putin wants to trade nukes for oil. he’s already buying up most of the world’s natural gas reserves (what does he hold rights to now, something like 60%?) He wants to raise Russia to world prominence by controlling energy…good plan but unfortunately by an evil man.
JustTruth101 on October 26, 2007 at 12:40 PM
So be it
Gregor on October 26, 2007 at 12:40 PM
When Iranian made nukes get into the hands of Chechen seperatists and are used with catastrophic results I wonder what Vlad will say?
Maybe we could tell him any type of military action against Chechniya or Georgia etc. would be viewed as an attack on the U.S.
Trooper on October 26, 2007 at 12:40 PM
I’ll wait for Putin to say it. He doesn’t want a war with the US and I doubt he would take this stand. His bombers have props for god’s sake.
The determining factor will be the response of europe to the new US sanctions. They go along we’re good. They don’t, here come the bombs.
sunny on October 26, 2007 at 12:41 PM
In my opinion, this is all the more reason to dump on Iran as soon as possible.
Gregor on October 26, 2007 at 12:41 PM
Turn about is fair play then. An Iranian attack on American soldiers [which has already occurred] will be considered an attack by Russia upon The United States. So… no more money… no more trade… no more visas… no more subsidies… no more cooperation between space programs… missle defense moves forward.
Griz on October 26, 2007 at 12:42 PM
I guess since I defended the First Lady yesterday, I’ll take up for GW today before someone claims he is getting played. Here’s the quote that gets him grief: “I was able to get a sense of his soul…a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country…”
Putin has shown himself to be exactly that and Bush’s assessment is correct. Putin puts country first.
Spirit of 1776 on October 26, 2007 at 12:42 PM
I suspect the Russian nukes are somewhat under maintaned. Ours are. A non-nuclear takeout of the iranian facillities should not force the former head of the KGB to lauch. I doubt if the Russian government would risk world-wide catastrophy to defend a bunch of fourth century lunatics.
The “past glory of the soviet union” is just that: Past glory. Not likely the rest of the country would follow him.
Texas Nick 77 on October 26, 2007 at 12:43 PM
I’d like to see Condi make a visit…and have a little “talk” about how much they’ve lost over the years, in nuclear and conventional munitions, GDP, civilian migration & birth decline, military “battles”, scientists, etc. etc.
This isn’t just a discussion about Russia’s loss to terrorism…it’s also their atrophy to the global market. They cannot purport to add teeth to this threat. I think we should remind them of how we can help them look better or we can make them look really stupid here.
Miss_Anthrope on October 26, 2007 at 12:44 PM
Slimy, smirky little crapweasel. He has always talked out of both sides of his mouth, and he will never change. I think he is evil to the core. He hates that he was too young to be the leader of a world superpower — so he is doing his best to re-create it. I just hope he is smart enough to understand reality when it bites him in the ass.
lan astaslem on October 26, 2007 at 12:46 PM
I’m not sure we can do that, though. I wish that were an option, but I just don’t know.
see-dubya on October 26, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Does Putin want to give Iran the ability to start Global Nukular War by Nuking Isreal?
Even Kruschev wasn’t dumb enough to give Castro command of the Cuban missles because that’s EXACTLY what Fidel wanted to do.
boris on October 26, 2007 at 12:55 PM
On a side note, Europe has been ripping on the US for several years now. How long does everyone think it will take for them to come begging the USA for help if Russia continues being belligerent towards Europe?
GogglesPisano on October 26, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Has the govt of Iran condemned the murderers of the Beslan massacre in Russia? Has anybody asked Iran that question?
Kokonut on October 26, 2007 at 1:00 PM
That doesn’t mean Israel can’t knock them out for us.
Rick on October 26, 2007 at 1:00 PM
Not applicable if he doesn’t think Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.
Mark Jaquith on October 26, 2007 at 1:01 PM
Given Israel’s astonishing success in their raid on Syria during which current Russian defensive technology proved laughably impotent, I doubt Vlad really believes a confrontation with the US is in Russia’s (or his own)best interest.
More likely he is gambling on the weak kneed cowardly dems to squeal about brinksmanship and have the Democratic party accomplish politically what Russia cannot militarily, a plan that was succeeding during the Carter (read pre Ronald Reagan) years.
Alamo on October 26, 2007 at 1:01 PM
I like end of the world talk, but I fear it is only talk. I have no doubt that the US and its allies could soundly defeat Russia and its allies in any nuclear exchange. JFK bet on it, and won. Our tactical and strategic advantage over Russia is bigger now than it was then.
jihadwatcher on October 26, 2007 at 1:02 PM
If he didn’t think so, he wouldn’t have joined two rounds of UN sanctions.
Allahpundit on October 26, 2007 at 1:02 PM
You might read this GogglesPisano. The location and estimated trajectory of in-bound is interesting and hints to more Europe-US communion then meets the eye.
Spirit of 1776 on October 26, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Sorry, I don’t buy it… this is Iran putting words into Putin’s mouth, for their own reasons.
Hey Bush! Get Putty on the phone and ASK HIM DIRECTLY!!! Tape it, and publish it…
Oil hit $92 a barrel today… driving up the profits Puttin is getting from the Russian reserves… he may stir the pot, but he won’t go to war over Iran because if we attack Iran? Oil goes even higher….
Romeo13 on October 26, 2007 at 1:08 PM
You’ll be pleased to know then that he said he wouldn’t comment until he spoke to Putin:)
Spirit of 1776 on October 26, 2007 at 1:10 PM
Cold War I have missed the.
Theworldisnotenough on October 26, 2007 at 1:11 PM
Typical Russian diplomacy, rattle a big hollow stick.
After the “advanced” Russian early warning system failure Sept. 6th allowing the Israelis free access to Syrian airspace, Putin needs to patch up customer relations with big ruble spending Iran.
That means publicly bashing the great Satan.
Speakup on October 26, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Perhaps what Putin needs is a nice overflight of Moscow by a couple of B-2’s, just to remind him of how impotent Russia is. A pre-emptive strike on Iran could include an equally pre-emptive strike on Russia.
A couple of B-2’s could eliminate Russia’s ability to make any kind of retaliatory strike before Russia even knew that they had been attacked. Russian technology has stood still for the last 30 years, American technology has not.
doriangrey on October 26, 2007 at 1:14 PM
30,000 lb bunker busters come to mind…
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3771522&page=1
Texas Nick 77 on October 26, 2007 at 1:15 PM
Well said. At least, this should be a serious threat.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on October 26, 2007 at 1:15 PM
Amen. All in or nothing at all.
infidel4life on October 26, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Rant and threaten all you want Pootie-Poo…
you still look like Mr. PotatoHead
Always Right on October 26, 2007 at 1:16 PM
I seriously doubt that. He’s taking a big gamble by thinking there’s something to gain from Russia’s friendship with Iran. He probably thinks he can control Iran in some way by doing this, while weakening the US’ position at the same time. Hmmm, I seem to recall the Soviets taking a similar position on Afghanistan about 20+ years ago.
Rick on October 26, 2007 at 1:17 PM
Good read. Can we complain about Russia’s “interceptors” because it would hinder our ability to kill them? Operational or not.
sunny on October 26, 2007 at 1:18 PM
I lived through it. You didn’t miss much.
“Duck! And cover.”
Fallout shelters.
Living with a nuclear hammer over your head.
A fatalistic attitude. Any wonder why we lost our morals in the sixties?
Texas Nick 77 on October 26, 2007 at 1:18 PM
Okay, so that explains the uptick in Russian bomber flights to Europe and N. America and the Russians pulling bombers and missiles out of mothballs. I suspected as much.
crosspatch on October 26, 2007 at 1:21 PM
Oh my.
How are we going to grow food when there’s no sun? Krakatoa blowing it’s top was enough to cause climate change for what, 3 years? It resulted in massive food shortages. What will a nuclear exchange do?
PRCalDude on October 26, 2007 at 1:23 PM
Ummm, solve global warming?
doriangrey on October 26, 2007 at 1:26 PM
I guess the basement pot growers/dealers will be in high demand for legit jobs…
Rick on October 26, 2007 at 1:27 PM
GWB needs to keep pressure on that with the Russian Peoplez.
- The Cat
MirCat on October 26, 2007 at 1:29 PM
I doubt Russia would take issue if the US destroyed Russian defense tech sold to Iran. She’d love to sell Iran the same bag of tricks twice.
Russia is stupid, but they’re not crazy. They want Iran to have nuclear energy. They’re already trying to make that happen. They have the legal framework to do that.
Russia knows that an Iran with nuclear energy means lower costs of extraction of oil and gas resources. This means higher capital gains for Russia.
There is no chance Russia wants Iran to have nuclear weapons. Not even the Soviet Communists were willing to put nukes in the hands of non-Russians.
Putin’s betting on Russia being able to stifle, slow, stall, and stagnate any Iranian attempt to develop nuclear weapons.
gabriel sutherland on October 26, 2007 at 1:33 PM
Actually cannabis makes a delightful salad with artichoke hearts and a nice vinaigrette.
;-)
infidel4life on October 26, 2007 at 1:34 PM
Dust off the “massive first strike” type war plans, boys. We’ve got a freakin’ hero here.
mojo on October 26, 2007 at 1:38 PM
All of a sudden we are to believe what an anonymous person in Iran says?
bnelson44 on October 26, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Maybe it’s the English Lit. degree, but I read that as more rhetorical, like:
Cold War, I Have Missed Thee.
Non?
Miss_Anthrope on October 26, 2007 at 1:52 PM
putin is a SMALL moron like ahmapieceofpig…just noticed that…I hope he has a ‘big’ bunker too…
areseaoh on October 26, 2007 at 1:58 PM
30-40 years ago the Soviets actually backed up their words with deeds. Unfortunately all of their military spending back then was for naught. They couldn’t keep up and ended up bankrupting their feeble, lopsided economy.
Today, Putin is talking smack with nothing to back it up. Sorta like his new bosom buddy, Ahmadinejad.
They’re inviting themselves to some serious @sskicking.
fogw on October 26, 2007 at 2:02 PM
Yes, see-dubya, it’s called Prompt Global Response.
Not cheap, but quite effective, and sh*t-kickin’ accurate, including the use of the new 30,000lb bunker buster and Trident D4’s refitted with conventional warheads.
Also, guys, don’t forget that Putie has got to rattle his saber because US military weapons and doctrine embarrassed the hell out of Russia with us having taken Baghdad in only three weeks, using small, mobile forces & weapons having pinpoint accuracy, with minimal collateral damage.
Money quote from a more in-depth review of US vs Russian military doctrine as executed in Iraq, by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (emphasis mine):
Now in order to deny area access, Putie is going after the US’ soft underbelly – its [Democratic] reluctance to project force.
I believe the reason the Democrats loved Clinton and Yeltsin was because both were preoccupied so much with their own vices that they ignored strategic threats (Clinton with his “legacy” building and tail-chasing, and Yeltsin with his vodka). Putie is correcting those mistakes in Russia, first by pretending to be friends with GWB in 2001 and now rattling his saber whilst spewing leftist “peace” rhetoric. GWB has tried to correct the mistakes of Clinton, having prevented any further terrorist incidents on US soil or embassies during his term, but his response to other threats (especially the threat of lax border security) has been weak.
Wanderlust on October 26, 2007 at 2:12 PM
One more thing along those lines: go back and review just how Clinton exercised the projection of force by the US military during his term: unlike Rumsfeld’s push to go smaller and lighter to accomplish fast response followed by heavier deployments, Clinton ensured in every conflict that the US would act as a “tripwire” but without a meaningful defensive capability, and no resolve to follow up with heavier deployments.
In other words, he used the US military as a pawn, and was all too willing to cede the chessboard to his opponent the moment forces got bloodied (e.g., Somalia). This lack of resolve and follow-up emboldened Osama bin Laden and others to attack the US or its interests again and again during his term.
Wanderlust on October 26, 2007 at 2:22 PM
Whatever you say Pu’tang.
I guess the new game plan is to strike Iran and keep a hefty reserve for Russia? As soon as you see MacDonald’s evacuating their Russian employees, you know it’s on.
“Operation Patton” (dah-dada-dah-dada-dah-dada-dah)
Hening on October 26, 2007 at 2:22 PM
The new Polish Prez may thin twice about turning down the SDI bases now.
RobCon on October 26, 2007 at 2:23 PM
Well, let’s get cracking on that missile shield. While we’re at it, I think we can use some more long range bombers, and some more Ohio class submarines. I’m pretty sure we can bankrupt Russia once more in an arms race, despite their new found wealth at the expense of high oil prices.
We’d better get going now while we still have some manufacturing capacity that hasn’t been shipped to China or Mexico.
reaganaut on October 26, 2007 at 2:33 PM
Good we could get a 2fer…
Wade on October 26, 2007 at 2:36 PM
“I’m pretty sure we can bankrupt Russia once more in an arms race, despite their new found wealth at the expense of high oil prices.”
Umm, false. Oil and gas prices along with Putin’s jailing of anyone that opposes him in Russia places him in control of about 25 trillion in unrealized capital gains.
Unless oil prices tank through some angelic intervention, we have to get used to Russia using economic warfare like the Soviets used political warfare. Russia can’t really do the US a lot of damage, but they can create havoc for our allies.
gabriel sutherland on October 26, 2007 at 2:41 PM
In the cover pic…is Dinnerjacket standing on a box or is Putin on bended knee?
Limerick on October 26, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Probably not a hell of a lot. Volcanoes spew out cubic miles of ash. Nuclear weapons do not.
jihadwatcher on October 26, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Michael Ledeen over on National Review online has an article in which he states:
If true, what would be so sensitive that one would not dare to have it leak out. So sensitive that not even an interpreter would be present, just the two principle parties?
This is not a poker game, folks. You never bluff, you never fold, and you always call.
rockhauler on October 26, 2007 at 2:56 PM
If the article had said Putin would not support or condone a US attack and instead would give aid support to Iran. I would have bit that.
But Russia going to War with the US over Iran? I would call odds on that as nill at best.
C-Low on October 26, 2007 at 3:21 PM
Both.
Rick on October 26, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Well, if you live near a US target area a few hundred fifty megaton devices could detonate on your doorstep, if however you live in New Zealand, your tea cup might rattle a little bit.
Speakup on October 26, 2007 at 3:51 PM
I say we un-forgive the outstanding loans that Russia owed. That was a big incentive to their economic recovery. I would also like to see Europe do a little more to protect themselves from this little windbag, but they won’t. When it comes crunch time, we’ll get a knock on the door. Oh, and how about sending home the thugs they so willingly allowed to emigrate from the old Soviet Union to every part of the globe….we got some, as did Europe, Israel, Australia, and Canada.
24K lady on October 26, 2007 at 3:51 PM
it’s a shame that the president of my country supports the terrorist regime of Iran.
PS
I’m a Russian citizen.
Sokrovenno on October 26, 2007 at 5:44 PM
A Russia/Iran alliance would dominate most of the world’s energy supplies. An Iron-Koran curtain with the west left out in the cold, literally and figuratively. That vision must be giving both Putin and the Mullahs hard-ons. Somehow the US must break up that lovefest.
dhimwit on October 26, 2007 at 6:03 PM
Putin’s a d**k.
ahem on October 26, 2007 at 10:12 PM
Don’t stop the visas. Why do you think Russia’s population is shrinking? We keep bringing over their women. I know I love my hot Russian wife.
Want to really cripple Russia? Offer a visa to every Russian woman between the age of 18 and 24. Come to think of it, it would also cripple feminism in this country. A win/win?
Bill C on October 26, 2007 at 11:30 PM
Bill C – you are perfectly correct.
On the other hand, we’re being subjected to the aggressive anti-American propaganda. Many young women are participating in sect-like pro-Kremlin mobs such as “Nashi” or “Mestnie”. They are completely brainwashed and hate America, so my guess is that not many women will leave Russia as mail-order brides.
Sokrovenno on October 27, 2007 at 4:14 AM
…or a proud patriot who picked his country up from the gutter and who now is enjoying payback time. We bankrupted the USSR with an arms race; he can return the favor with his oil.
But a seriously weakened USA isn’t good for Russia, not with neighbors like China and Islam. Wish somebody in Washington could get this through Putin’s noggin. Wish somebody in Washington could get this through his own noggin.
dhimwit on October 27, 2007 at 8:00 AM
Maybe “nuclear winter” is the answer to “global warming?”
One crisis at a time, please. My hair is turning grey.
Texas Nick 77 on October 27, 2007 at 9:00 AM
Comment pages: