The latest round of U.S.–Russia talks aimed at stabilizing diplomatic relations has been postponed at Washington’s request, signaling a shift in U.S. foreign policy priorities. According to Farhad Mammadov, Director of the Center for South Caucasus Studies (CQTM) in Baku, the suspension may be linked to increasing efforts by the U.S. to pressure Iran amid the ongoing military escalation in the Middle East.
In a post on his Telegram channel @mneniyefm, Mammadov noted that the pause in bilateral talks came shortly after a phone call between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, where Iran was reportedly the main topic. Mammadov argues that Washington’s goal is to involve Moscow in brokering a deal with Tehran — one that would amount to Iran’s capitulation, including a complete renunciation of its nuclear program and dismantling of its missile capabilities.
“For Russia, the situation is double-edged. On one hand, the Iran-Israel war and increased U.S. arms deliveries to the Middle East may reduce American focus on Ukraine — which benefits Moscow. On the other hand, Russia cannot afford a total Iranian defeat or regime change in Tehran. Strategically, that would be a loss for the China–Russia alliance in the Middle East,” Mammadov wrote.
He also pointed to growing discussions among experts about a possible “Iran-for-Ukraine” exchange — suggesting the U.S. might offer concessions on Ukraine if Russia helps neutralize the Iranian threat. But Mammadov cautioned that such logic is flawed: Russia lacks the capacity and influence to meaningfully shape Iran’s strategic decisions.
“If Putin agrees to negotiate Tehran’s surrender on Trump’s terms, he risks looking like Trump’s subordinate — a perception that would not sit well in Beijing,” he added.
Mammadov believes Russia’s ideal scenario would be persuading Tehran to accept U.S. conditions while ensuring regime survival and the withdrawal of Israeli presence from Iranian airspace. Yet this scenario is highly unrealistic in the short term. Moreover, Iranian leadership is far from aligned with Moscow and has shown interest in direct talks with Washington, especially after realizing that Russian-American normalization might involve trade-offs concerning Iran.
“Russia cannot truly assist Iran in this crisis — only China, perhaps via Pakistan, has that leverage,” Mammadov observed. “But Israel has already established air dominance over Iran and is not giving it up.”
He also noted the potential role of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who is actively positioning himself as a regional mediator. Still, Ankara’s ability to influence Tehran is also limited. Should Iran agree to U.S. terms, it would likely opt for direct negotiations with Washington, sidelining both Russia and Turkey.
“The end of the Iran-Israel war will establish a new regional status quo that could be long-lasting. Major players are already maneuvering to secure their post-war positions,” Mammadov said, warning that the durability of the Iranian regime and the involvement of third-party countries in the conflict remain key variables.
“In today’s world, international diplomacy depends not only on what happens on the ground — but, in Iran’s case, also on what happens in the skies,” he concluded.
