Russia’s War Against Ukraine and the USA and Israel’s Military Operation Against Iran.
A Comparative Analysis
At present, among the most significant factors influencing global developments are Russia’s war against Ukraine and the USA and Israel’s military operation against Iran;
despite the different nature of these events, a comparative analysis of them allows us to identify our country’s strengths and weaknesses in the military confrontation with Russia and to make appropriate decisions.
Wars have always been one of the main driving forces behind the development of the military-political landscape and the economic situation in the world. This is all the more true of those waged by leading states and affecting the interests of many other countries. Russia’s war against Ukraine and the USA and Israel’s military operations against Iran are no exception. There are both, differences and common features, but taking these into account, one key conclusion can be drawn. In modern wars, total military, economic and demographic superiority over the enemy does not guarantee victory. That superiority can be countered by thorough preparation for war, resolute resistance, asymmetric actions, effective technological solutions and assistance from allies and partners. This topic is of great significance and deserves attention. Let us therefore examine this experience in detail, specifically through a comparative analysis of the two wars, namely with regard to the nature of their participants, the causes of the conflict and its course, as well as its consequences.
Ukraine and Iran are entirely different countries and are, in fact, military adversaries. This is quite obvious and indisputable, but let us take a closer look at them.
Ukraine is a democratic country, whilst the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) is totalitarian and clerical. Ukraine’s aim is to resist Russia’s attempts to destroy it as an independent state, to defend its national development and to integrate into Europe. Iran, meanwhile, seeks to dominate the Islamic world and destroy Israel as a bastion of the West and democracy in the region.
Ukraine is now among the democratic states and has already become part of Europe and the Western world. Iran, alongside Russia and other totalitarian countries, forms part of the “axis of evil”. In line with its ideology, Iran supports Russia’s war against Ukraine, which is, in fact, a war against Western civilisation, which it regards as hostile. For its part, Ukraine has broadly joined the USA and Israel’s military operation against Iran, assisting their partners in the Middle East in strengthening their air defences.
Having possessed nuclear weapons, Ukraine voluntarily renounced them and acceded to the international Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Perhaps this was a mistake, as the promised security guarantees for Ukraine’s nuclear disarmament were never provided. However, it has no plans to restore its nuclear status or to develop a “dirty bomb” or other types of weapons of mass destruction.
Unlike Ukraine, Iran is seeking to acquire nuclear weapons as a means of exerting pressure on its neighbours and Europe, as well as a bargaining chip in its confrontation with the USA and Israel. This is evidenced by the Islamic Republic of Iran’s (IRI) actions to enrich uranium to the weapons-grade levels. Moreover, Tehran is likely being aided in this endeavour by Moscow and Beijing, which may be sharing nuclear technology with it.
There is also a difference between the goals of Russia and the USA in their wars against Ukraine and Iran. Although, under the current US leadership headed by Donald Trump, they are beginning to resemble one another.
Russia is a totalitarian state under Putin’s autocratic rule. It is now beginning to weaken, but for the time being it is holding its ground. The US has been and remains the world’s largest democracy. However, Donald Trump is attempting to turn his administration into a dictatorship. He is succeeding to some extent, although such actions are meeting with fierce resistance from American society.
The stated aim of Russia’s so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine was officially its “denazification” and “demilitarization”, as well as preventing Ukraine’s joining NATO. It has now been narrowed down to demands for the transfer of the entire Donbas region to Moscow. However, its primary goal remains the destruction of Ukraine as an independent state, which Moscow regards as the main prerequisite for Russia’s revival as a major world power. Apart from conquering Ukraine itself, it hoped to simultaneously intimidate the West into recognising its sphere of influence within the former USSR.
The USA and Israel’s military operation against Iran is being carried out under the pretext of the need to deprive it of the ability to develop nuclear weapons and to force it to abandon its anti-American and anti-Israeli policies. Although, as Donald Trump himself admits, the real aim of the operation is to secure the USA’s access to Iranian oil. Should these plans be realised, the USA will extend its control over global oil reserves to more than half of the total. This will enable America to strengthen its international position and establish its dominance in the world. In other words, the true goals of the wars waged by Russia and the USA are virtually identical and reflect their imperialist policies.
In preparing to attack their adversaries, both Moscow and Washington relied on their overwhelming superiority in terms of forces and resources. That is why they hoped for a blitzkrieg and a swift victory. But the situation began to unfold differently.
For certain reasons, Ukraine did not have time to prepare for war properly. However, a number of measures were nevertheless taken, including with the help of our partners. In particular, the USA supplied Ukraine with artillery, MANPADS and ATGMs, whilst Türkiye provided “Bayraktar” reconnaissance and strike UAVs. At the same time, special forces units were deployed along the routes of Russian troop movements and subsequent logistics operations within Ukraine.
However, the main role in the first phase of the war was played by the Ukrainian people’s determination to defend their homeland. Instead of the “welcoming of Russian troops with flowers” that Moscow had expected in Ukraine, it encountered fierce resistance from the Ukrainians, even before the main body of our country’s Defence Forces had entered the battle. Their use of the aforementioned weapons became an asymmetric response to Russia. Consequently, its blitzkrieg, with plans to capture Kyiv “in three days” and the whole of Ukraine “in two weeks”, was thwarted. Russian troops were cut off from their supply lines in northern Ukraine and forced to withdraw from the region. Ukraine then routed their military units out of Kharkiv region. Following this, it drove them out of Mykolaiv region and the right-bank part of Kherson region. Subsequently, decisive actions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and large-scale financial, economic, and military-technical support for Ukraine from the USA, Europe, and other partners enabled our country to significantly strengthen its defence and effectively turn the war into a stalemate.
Of greatest importance to Ukraine is the supply of modern air defence systems, UAVs, aircraft, artillery and missile systems, along with their associated ammunition. At the same time, the capabilities of the Ukrainian defence industry are being relocated to European countries, which guarantees their security and provides access to modern technologies.
Against this background, Western sanctions are undermining Russia’s economy, reducing its ability to continue the war. Moreover, assistance to Russia from its partners – primarily China, Belarus, Iran and North Korea – is limited. And today, Russia is also forced to assist Iran. As a result, Ukraine is gradually beginning to turn the tide of the war in our favour. Indeed, the Armed Forces of Ukraine have managed to significantly slow down the aggressor’s advance and even outnumber it on the front line in terms of long-range UAVs and drones. Iran’s leadership and, at least, part of its society are also attempting to counter their adversaries. Despite the liquidation by the USA and Israel of the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran, as well as the destruction of its air defence, air force, navy and military industry, it is not prepared to give up. The USA’s hopes for a possible new uprising in Iran have not materialized either, following the brutal suppression of the previous one by the country’s authorities earlier this year. After America left the rebels to their fate, despite having promised assistance, the Iranians ceased to trust it.
Moreover, Iran managed to take effective asymmetric countermeasures. As is well known, these were missile and drone strikes on US military bases and those of its allies in the Middle East, as well as on the oil and gas infrastructure of neighbouring Persian Gulf states. At the same time, Iran blocked the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world’s oil consumption passes. As a result, global oil prices rose sharply, forcing the USA to suspend hostilities and begin negotiations with Iran. But Tehran remains firm in its position.
In other words, unlike the USA’s lightning-fast military operation in Venezuela in January this year, the American blitzkrieg in Iran has failed. The reason for this was that Iran had prepared thoroughly for war: arrangements had been made to ensure the rapid replacement of the country’s leaders in case of their death; highly secure shelters had been built for government bodies, weapons depots and military facilities; underground launch sites for Iranian missiles – which are difficult to detect and strike from the air – had been deployed; contingency plans had been drawn up in case of an attack, including those of an asymmetric nature.
Iran also relied on its partners, the main ones being China and Russia. However, their assistance was not decisive. It is likely that, once the war begins, it will receive MANPADS, missiles and UAVs from them, but not in quantities sufficient to alter the course of the war.
That said, the USA has not received assistance from its allies either, with the exception of Israel. NATO member states refused to support this military operation against Iran. Some of them even closed their airspace to American aircraft involved in the war in the Middle East. A few European countries agreed only to participate in ensuring the safety of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz after the end of hostilities. This was prompted by Europe’s negative attitude to the USA’s war against Iran, and was also a response to D. Trump’s disregard for European interests.
The consequences of Russia’s war against Ukraine and the USA and Israel’s military operation against Iran are also highly telling.
Indeed, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has irrevocably shattered the global system of collective security that emerged after the Second World War. At the same time, the Cold War between Russia and the West has fully reignited.
Europe perceived Moscow’s actions as a direct threat to its security, which united most European countries around a common response to potential Russian aggression. In particular, a large-scale program of rearmament in Europe was launched. As a result, NATO was strengthened, although Donald Trump subsequently began to undermine its unity with his anti-European policies.
At this, Ukraine’s role and significance for Europe as one of the main forces in containing Russia’s military expansion increased. In view of this, Ukraine was incorporated into the Euro-Atlantic and European security system as a key element.
In turn, the war in the Middle East and, as a consequence, rising oil prices, created the threat of a slowdown in the global economy and a recession. However, this also spurred the development of “green” and energy-saving technologies.
Furthermore, the USA’s attempts to draw Europe into a war against Iran, and Europe’s refusal to do so, have been a major factor in undermining NATO’s unity. This has also weakened the West’s ability to collectively stand up to Russia and, more broadly, the “axis of evil”. As a result, Europe’s interest in Ukraine as the frontline of its defence against Russia has increased. At the same time, Ukraine has expanded its partnership with countries in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf through its involvement in strengthening their air defence systems.
As might have been expected, the adventurous nature of Putin’s and Trump’s wars has had negative consequences for Russia and the USA themselves. Indeed, Russia has plunged into an economic crisis, and only rising oil prices are keeping it “afloat”. At the same time, since the start of the war, it has lost its influence in regions of the world that are important to it, particularly in the Middle East, North Africa and even in the post-Soviet space – the Caucasus. Putin’s own position has also been weakened, as he can no longer fully control the situation in the country. And his authority among Russians is noticeably declining.
Similar problems have arisen in the USA. Donald Trump’s latest row with Europe, this time over Iran, has further exacerbated Europeans’ negative attitude to America. Moreover, the war itself has been condemned by the majority of American citizens. As a result, D. Trump has not only failed to boost the Republican Party’s approval ratings ahead of the congressional elections, but has caused them to plummet even further.
The war in the Middle East has also harmed Ukraine. It has diverted the international community’s attention away from Ukraine, jeopardised the supply of American weapons, and enabled Russia to generate windfall profits due to rising oil prices, thereby enhancing its ability to continue the war against Ukraine.
Thus, as demonstrated by Russia’s war against Ukraine and the USA and Israel’s military operation against Iran, superiority in forces and resources does not guarantee victory over the enemy. For every force, there are other forces capable of countering it. The main such forces include thorough preparation for war, a mindset geared towards countering the enemy, however strong it may be, the ability to carry out asymmetric responses with high effectiveness, technological advancements, and the presence of reliable allies and partners.
In this regard, Ukraine’s main advantages have been the ability of Ukrainian society to unite to repel an attack from Russia, a technological edge over Russia, and support from the USA and the EU. In its turn, Iran’s strengths lie in its thorough preparation for war, stability of its government, and ability to create critical problems for the enemy through asymmetric methods. Ukraine must take these aspects into consideration.
Despite their formidable military capabilities, Russia and the USA have failed to quickly achieve their goals. The reason lies in an overestimation of their own strength and an underestimation of their opponent’s. Such mistakes are characteristic of dictators, which Putin is and D. Trump is trying to become.
The consequences of the wars waged by Russia and the USA are generally negative. This applies to all those involved and, indeed, to the world at large. Although Ukraine has made certain gains in terms of enhancing its role and significance for Europe and its friendly neighbours in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf.
Yurii Ilchenko,
Institute for Global Politics
