BRICS talks go on as missiles fall a Russian analyst shares what he saw and heard in the Iranian capital

"No panic. Everyone is just getting on with their work."

That's how Adlan Margoev, a Russian foreign policy expert currently in Tehran, describes the mood in the Iranian capital after Israel's dramatic airstrikes on military and nuclear targets. Speaking to Moscow newspaper Kommersant's Elena Chernenko from his hotel in northwestern Tehran, where he is attending a BRICS-related conference with other Russian scholars, Margoev offers a calm but clear-eyed account of events on the ground, Iran's likely response, and the potential collapse of nuclear negotiations with the US.

Elena Chernenko: As I understand it, you are now in Tehran with a group of Russian experts. What are you doing there?

Adlan Margoev:We are attending a joint conference with the Iranian side on BRICS and the Russian-Iranian strategic partnership. Our regular work involves informing the Iranian side about opportunities for bilateral and multilateral cooperation, discussing problematic issues in bilateral and multilateral relations, and focusing on how to strengthen such cooperation through various mechanisms.

EC: It was known in advance that Israel was preparing to attack Iran. Did you sense any danger? Was anyone warning you about anything?

AM:No, everything went on as normal and continues to do so. Iranians are used to the fact that there is always a risk of attacks and sabotage. One of the ordinary participants of our conference from the Iranian side (who is not in a position of responsibility, it should be emphasized) said, 'We have been fighting imperialism for so long that we are used to everything.' In general, Iranians maintain a friendly and calm attitude. We continue to work in the same vein.

EC: Where are you located?

AM:We are staying in a hotel in the north-west of Tehran. The conference is also taking place here and will continue today.

EC: No change?

AM:Except that the cultural event scheduled for tonight in the city has been cancelled.

EC: Tell me what happened last night.

AM:When it all started, we were asleep. One of our delegation's leaders was the first to wake up. At around three o'clock, she heard explosions from the strikes and the air defense systems that had been activated. A second round of strikes occurred at six o'clock in the morning. Needless to say, we were awake by then. We followed the news reports to find out what was happening. Among other things, we learned that the airspace had been closed. We have a return flight scheduled for Sunday.

EC: Are you thinking of leaving the country urgently by land?

AM:No, that would be an overreaction at this stage.

EC: So there's no panic on your part or on the part of others on the ground?

AM:There is no panic within the limits of what we can see.

Researcher at the MGIMO Institute of International Studies, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia Adlan Margoev.

EC: Nevertheless, the situation looks much more serious than the shelling that took place between Israel and Iran last year, right?

AM:Much more serious. The escalation comes at an extremely crucial moment because Iranian-American nuclear talks have been ongoing since April and the next round was scheduled for Sunday in Oman. I did not expect Israel to launch an attack while these talks were ongoing. Now, however, I doubt that the talks will continue.

EC: Judging by the statements of American officials, it seems that the US was aware of Israel's plans.

AM:No, but they were preparing for the possibility of such events occurring. They warned their diplomatic staff in the region and took a number of other steps.

EC: What kind of response do you expect from Iran?

AM:We have recently heard that Iran's response will differ from their 'True Promise' operations in response to the Israeli strikes in April 2024, as well as from their response to the previous round of Israeli attacks in 2024.

EC: Yes, it was quite restrained.

AM:Yes, it was done in such a way as to avoid further escalation. It is hard to say how the Iranian leadership will react now, but we will know soon.

EC: US President Donald Trump has questioned whether the US will be able to reach a deal with Iran over its nuclear program. Can we already talk about the failure of those talks?

AM:In retrospect, it's easy to say that the systemic positions of Iran and the United States were so far apart, especially regarding uranium enrichment, that the outcome of the negotiations was predictable.

However, we have been monitoring the internal dynamics within the Trump administration to see which team or school of thought will prevail. Will it be that limited enrichment in Iran is Iran's natural right as a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), like other member states? Or that, despite the NPT, Iran should not be allowed to engage in enrichment activities independently? President Trump, Vice President J.D. Vance and Steve Witkoff, head of the US negotiating delegation, have generally adopted a moderate stance, assuming that Iran can continue to exercise its right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. However, the opposing team, led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, essentially reversed the results of several rounds of negotiations by stating that there could be no enrichment in Iran. Unfortunately, this harder line won out.

And, in behind-the-scenes conversations over the course of several months, the Iranian side confirmed that at each new round of negotiations, the American delegation arrived with a position as if there had been no previous round. Steve Witkoff would leave Muscat or Rome (where the negotiations were also taking place - Kommersant) with a reasonable approach to the Iranian position. However, each time, his consultations in Washington reversed the process. At the next round of negotiations, he reiterated that there could be no uranium enrichment in Iran. This, of course, frustrated the Iranian side. Nevertheless, they invested in the negotiation process. There were hopes that a rational and pragmatic approach with a view to peacefully resolving the crisis would prevail in the United States. However, as we can see, this did not happen.

EC: The Iranians have warned that if Israel were to attack, they could retaliate by targeting American facilities in the region. Do you expect Tehran to take such action?

AM:That's a good question. I would prefer not to speculate on the decisions Tehran might make. However, it still seems to me that it is not in Iran's interest to provoke the Americans and draw them into an escalation. I would therefore expect a tough response on Israeli targets and a more moderate response on American ones. Perhaps something similar to the Iranian strikes on US facilities in Iraq following the US assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani. Around 100 Americans were concussed in those attacks, but there were no fatalities.

From the perspective of avoiding a regional war, it would probably be sensible to give Israel a tough response, but to separate this from any tacit agreement by the US to allow such an operation. The big question is whether this will stop at exchanges of strikes on nuclear and/or military infrastructure or whether attacks on civilian targets will follow, which could lead to a major regional war.

EC: Russia and Iran recently signed a Strategic Cooperation Treaty. Although there is no clause obliging either party to intervene in the event of an attack, the two countries still consider each other to be allies. What kind of reaction does Iran expect from Russia?

AM:Judging by what is said publicly and non-publicly, the Iranians will expect the harshest possible condemnation of Israel's actions. They will also expect Russia and China to raise this issue at various international forums, such as the UN Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Additionally, we can expect the Iranians to be even more interested in continuing military-technical cooperation with Russia, including the supply of additional defense equipment - but this is not for public discussion.

This article was first published byKommersant, and was translated and edited by the RT team.

(RT.com)