Russian imperialism and the Zionist state. Lessons from the Iranian crisis

Why did the US, Israel and Russia voted together at the UN against condemning the invasion of Ukraine? What campism doesn't want to see

Italian version

The story of the war against Iran sheds light on various aspects of the global scenario, even on those that may not be immediately obvious and on those that the ideological blindness of campism refuses to see. One of these aspects is the relationship between Russian imperialism and the Zionist state. But let's take it one step at a time.

The first indisputable fact that emerged was the refusal by Russia and China of any military assistance to Iran when it was under attack. They issued “concerned” statements, with very cautious tones, but they were only words. No commitment to military protection was made, even for the future, even as a deterrent threat, let alone direct military aid. Zionist (supported by American bombers) were allowed to use their firepower for twelve days in the skies over Tehran, after destroying Iranian anti-aircraft defences, without any of Iran's major allies moving to its defence. Putin felt the need to clarify that the partnership between Russia and Iran - celebrated with great fanfare a few months earlier - does not formally include a binding commitment to provide military aid to Iran in the event of a hostile attack, but only a commitment not to help the aggressor. In any case, Russia made the political choice to refuse assistance, even as a threat.
A paradox: the Iranian theocratic regime has provided Russia with state-of-the-art drones to destroy Ukrainian cities, but has not received even a penny's worth of anti-aircraft weapons at this dramatic moment of need. Neither from Putin, nor from the North Korean regime (certainly not stingy with aid to Russia), nor from China, which nevertheless uses Iranian oil. Nothing.
Even the BRICS area is dominated internally by imperialist relations: Russia and China are in command, the rest is their useful warehouse.
 
What's more, all the “concerned” statements by Russian and Chinese diplomats, proposing the resumption of negotiations between the US and Iran, were based on the common desire to reassure the so-called international community (i.e. primarily the imperialist states and Israel) that Iran would not build its own bomb. Russia's willingness to acquire and control Iranian uranium itself was presented as a form of guarantee to the US and Israel regarding Iran's disarmament.
But why endorse the arrogant veto on Iran's nuclear programme by the world's leading nuclear power (the US) and the Zionist nuclear state? Are Russia and China, at the head of the BRICS, not presenting themselves as the heralds of a new world order that will finally bring equity and justice? Is this not the ideological narrative loudly repeated by all the propaganda camps across the globe?

The truth is that Russian imperialism and Chinese imperialism exclusively pursue their own interests, exactly as US imperialism, European imperialist countries, and the Zionist state do. The ‘new world order’ for Russia and China is simply their right to negotiate a new division of the world with competing great powers.
Today, on behalf of US imperialism, Donald Trump acts as partner who’s more open to negotiate than in the past. The idea of a global negotiation between the three great powers (the US, Russia and China) for the division of their respective areas of influence, bypassing and marginalising European imperialist countries, is in fact the course of action adopted by the new American administration. If we don’t understand this, we won’t understand the essence of the new world scenario. European imperialist powers are rearming today not simply “because Trump asked them to” but above all because they fear being dumped by Trump. Only by rearming, at the expense of their own workers, they can hope to regain negotiating power, and thus a place at the table in the new division of the world.

We saw a reflection of this scenario during the Iranian crisis. Trump obtained from Putin a diplomatic pressure on Iran, so that Iran would resort only to a symbolic reaction to the American bombing, which was in fact “agreed” with the US itself. In return, Trump offered Putin a wider opening on Ukraine, which is what Putin needs.

But that's not all. Russia's low-key stance on the Iranian issue also reflects its relationship with the Zionist state. It is a deep-rooted relationship, partly concealed but long-standing. The US, Russia and Israel voting together at the UN General Assembly (on 24th February 2025) against condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine, third anniversary of the invasion, is further evidence of this unmentionable truth.
The Zionist state has two special relationships: the first with the United States, the second with Russia. Throughout the Russian war in Ukraine, the Zionist state has maintained a neutral position. Israel has opted out of Western sanctions against Russia, just as Russia has been careful not to break with Netanyahu on the Palestinian issue. An example of their ties is Roman Abramovich, the second richest man in Israel, and the Russian origin of a large part of Israel's hi tech geniuses.
When the USSR collapsed, a million Russians emigrated to Israel: they would have preferred to go to America, but Israel obtained a visa block from the US to divert the flow towards Tel Aviv. In many Israeli cities, only Russian is spoken. The Jewish community of Russian origin is now one of the strongholds of the Israeli right wing. Moreover, the history of Zionist colonisation from 1904 to 1914 was largely shaped by Russian immigration.
Even after the end of the Cold War, the relationship between Israel and Russia never faltered. During Bashar Assad's time, Moscow controlled the airspace of its ally, Syria. Nevertheless, the Israeli air force was allowed to strike arms trafficking between Iran and Lebanon, without Russia reacting (even when a Russian plane was accidentally shot down by the Israelis).

Campism is blind. Revolutionary Marxism is not. No oppressed people in the Middle East can count on 'friendly' imperialist countries. Because no imperialism is friends with oppressed peoples. A new world order will either be socialist or it will not be. Only revolution can change things.