Threat Perceptions and Self Declared Spheres of Influence Are Setting Stage in Eurasia

Threat Perceptions and Self Declared Spheres of Influence Are Setting Stage in Eurasia
TT

Threat Perceptions and Self Declared Spheres of Influence Are Setting Stage in Eurasia

Threat Perceptions and Self Declared Spheres of Influence Are Setting Stage in Eurasia

New Year in Europe started with tension and active diplomacy.

While the huge Russian military build-up near the borders of Ukraine led to speculations about the possibility of an invasion, Russia claimed it is threatened. It sought security guarantees and delivered its demands in writing to the USA and NATO. The highest level officials of the USA and NATO ruled out an agreement on Russian requests, but they renewed their offer to meet and this time Russia accepted.

Three back-to-back meetings were arranged in the first half of January. The first one was bilateral strategic dialogue consultations between the USA and Russia. Then NATO-Russia Council met in Brussels on 12 January, the first time in almost three years. The next day, there was a meeting within the framework of the OSCE.

Opposing views and outcome of the meetings

Russia’s position; NATO is a threat, must not expand eastwards, must not establish itself near its borders, must withdraw from former Eastern Bloc countries.

NATO’s position; Russia is a threat, open-door policy is there to stay, it is the right for each nation to choose own security arrangements, military presence eastern part of the Alliance will continue as needed.

The meetings produced no tangible results. In any case, this was not what was expected from the January meetings. These meetings enabled both sides to state and register their positions, once again. NATO spelled out specifically what it will not do and stated in general what could be considered. At this stage, the meetings basically served to release steam. Whether this was no more than a futile attempt or the first round of a process and the warming up for a new set of arms agreements remain to be seen.

The eastern part of Eurasia is also active

What happened in Kazakhstan is part of the same picture.

We need to recall the updated version of the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation which was signed by President Putin on 2 July 2021 sets the goals of Russian foreign policy and ways to achieve them.

This strategy emphasizes;

-deepening cooperation with CIS member states bilaterally and also within the framework of integration associations, the Eurasian Economic Union and the Collective Security Treaty Organization,
-helping to eliminate and prevent hotbeds of tension and conflict on the territories of neighboring states with Russia,
-increasing the role of Russia in peacekeeping activities,
-supporting allies and partners of Russia in dealing with issues related to defense and security, neutralizing attempts to interfere in their internal affairs.

I think what we witnessed in Kazakhstan is the implementation of all of the above and more.

Upon President Tokayev’s invitation, 2500 peacekeepers of the Russian-led Collective Treaty Security Organization (CTSO) moved into Kazakhstan. Riots were put down and according to reports, 10 days later all peacekeepers left.

In that way; the Russians demonstrated that the Organization is functional and it can deploy troops with a high level of preparedness at very short notice.

In other words, Russia demonstrated its ability and willingness to move into its sphere of influence under the umbrella of the organization whenever it deems necessary.

Eurasia is a single theater in international politics

Central Asia, the hearth of the ancient Silk Road, is so important for all nations once again. Its geographic location makes it an imperative transit route. Vast natural resources are sources of wealth, even though the distribution of this wealth is problematic.

On the other hand, the same geographic location makes them vulnerable to potential religious extremism and renewed Great Game-like competitions.

In this regard, what comes and goes around in Central Asia is vital for Russia and China in terms of implications on their own Muslim populations.

Russia and China are fully present in the region. In case of security it is more of Russia and in case of economy and investment it is more of China. These two nations have also demonstrated their ability to cooperate in the military field by conducting massive joint exercises.

The USA is now basically remembered with its disappointing in all senses performance in Afghanistan and the consequences of its hasty withdrawal.

A new player in the region is the Organization of Turkic States. It does not have a military dimension, but who knows what future may bring.

In conclusion;

-Russia has established a self declared sphere of influence/zone of self protection and seems determined to hold on to it with all means possible.

-Russia may have concerns, but so does the West and for good reason.

-With so many sophisticated and advanced weapons and technology, in the event of a war, everyone is destined to lose one way or another. Therefore, no matter how complicated problems are, diplomacy is the best way to achieve a lot, if given a chance.

-At his press conference after the January meeting, among other things, NATO Secretary General mentioned arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation. Why not a new generation of CSBM’s and arms control mechanisms of the 1990s?

-At present Ukraine appears to be the danger zone. But let us not lose sight of other potential trouble spots. In this regard, I hope that Bosnia does not turn out to be the spot to make Ukraine the much easier crisis to solve



Moscow Bets on Tehran’s Resilience, Western Rift

The Russian President attends events marking “Defender of the Fatherland Day” in Moscow on February 23 (AP)
The Russian President attends events marking “Defender of the Fatherland Day” in Moscow on February 23 (AP)
TT

Moscow Bets on Tehran’s Resilience, Western Rift

The Russian President attends events marking “Defender of the Fatherland Day” in Moscow on February 23 (AP)
The Russian President attends events marking “Defender of the Fatherland Day” in Moscow on February 23 (AP)

The Kremlin’s expectations appeared markedly pessimistic in the fourth week of the Iran war, as confidence grew that Russia’s ability to influence the conflict was waning and that the repercussions for one of its key partners could be severe.

With limited leverage, the Kremlin’s main options now seem to be avoiding direct involvement while closely monitoring the fallout, particularly signs of widening divisions between Washington and European capitals — and what one veteran Russian diplomat described as “driving the final wedge” into transatlantic relations.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov summed up the mood: “No reasonable person would dare predict how the situation in the Middle East will evolve, but it is clear that things are moving toward the worse.”

From the outset, Russian assessments have focused on two key assumptions: that air strikes alone cannot topple Iran’s political system, regardless of their scale, and that ending the war without a costly ground intervention would be difficult for the attacking parties.

A second assumption is that any cessation of hostilities would resemble the outcome of the brief 12-day war of 2025, with each side claiming success without achieving its ultimate objectives, particularly Israel’s stated goal of dismantling Iran’s ruling system.

Such a scenario would suit Moscow, even if Iran were to emerge weakened but still cohesive under its leadership.

Despite increasingly pessimistic forecasts about a potential geographic expansion of the conflict, Moscow believes Tehran has so far absorbed the initial blow and shifted the confrontation into a war of attrition. Russian officials are also banking on possible internal developments within Washington and Tel Aviv, as well as growing divergences with European allies.

Peskov has repeatedly stressed that military operations against Iran have led to greater cohesion among the Iranian people around their leadership, adding that attempts at regime change tend to produce the opposite effect.

He also condemned ongoing assassination campaigns targeting Iranian leaders, calling the situation “abnormal” and warning of “serious consequences.” In a pointed remark, he added that Iran is “actively defending itself against attacks on its territory.”

These statements underline Russia’s primary bet: that Iran’s internal stability will hold, while divisions deepen among its adversaries.

Putin’s mediation effort

President Vladimir Putin initially sought to use the crisis to bolster Russia’s diplomatic standing by proposing rapid mediation to halt the war.

During the first week, he held a series of calls with regional leaders, criticizing Iranian strikes on Gulf countries while emphasizing Moscow’s ability to send “direct messages” to Tehran.

Russia also revived earlier proposals discussed in Oman concerning Iran’s nuclear capabilities and missile program. Moscow offered to take control of enriched uranium and transfer it to Russian territory, while guaranteeing that Iran’s missile capabilities would not be used against Israel or neighboring states.

The proposal was also raised during Putin’s only call with US President Donald Trump in the second week of the war. However, it failed to gain traction in either Tel Aviv — which insists on a military solution — or Washington, where Trump signaled that Putin should first resolve the Ukraine conflict before seeking a role elsewhere.

Limited support for Iran

Against this backdrop, the Kremlin’s options for meaningful intervention appear extremely limited. Complicating matters are accusations that Moscow has provided valuable intelligence support to Iran.

These claims gained weight when US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff reportedly issued a strong warning to Moscow, and the issue was raised directly during the Trump-Putin call.

Nevertheless, Russian circles argue that Moscow has little choice but to continue offering indirect assistance to Tehran while avoiding provoking Washington.

According to Russian media sources, this support takes two main forms: sharing limited intelligence on Israeli movements — carefully calibrated to avoid harming US interests — and providing indirect backing through private companies specializing in cyber technologies, an area where Russia and China have made significant advances.

European repercussions

Another key aspect of Russia’s strategy is its close monitoring of how the war is affecting Ukraine and European positions, which Moscow still sees as the main obstacle to ending the conflict on its terms.

There is little concealment of Russian satisfaction at Europe’s difficulties amid the war, particularly fears over rising oil and gas prices and the prospect of easing sanctions on Moscow to offset supply shortages.

Kremlin commentary suggests that European priorities are shifting, with energy costs replacing Ukraine at the top of government agendas.

Veteran Russian diplomat Alexander Yakovenko argued that the Middle East crisis, combined with the fallout from Ukraine, is intensifying tensions within the transatlantic alliance.

He pointed to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz rejecting a US request to help secure the Strait of Hormuz as evidence of deepening strains. Trump, he noted, responded by describing NATO as a “paper tiger.”

According to Yakovenko, the coming weeks will be decisive for the Iran conflict and its broader consequences. He added that transatlantic relations are facing a severe crisis, with disagreements over Ukraine fueling European opposition to Trump, a factor that could influence the US midterm elections in November.

More broadly, he warned that a US setback in Iran would weaken Washington’s position vis-à-vis Beijing, noting that China has already used export controls on rare earth minerals to counter US trade pressure.

In this context, Yakovenko sees the emergence of three dominant global powers — the United States, China and Russia — with Europe increasingly sidelined.

Such a shift, he suggested, would echo the post-World War II Yalta-Potsdam order, albeit with China replacing Britain, marking the end of two centuries of Western containment of Russia.


Greek PM Announces New Mideast War Fallout Relief Measures

Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis speaks during a joint press conference with Cyprus' and France's presidents at Paphos military airport, in Paphos, Cyprus, 09 March 2026, (EPA)
Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis speaks during a joint press conference with Cyprus' and France's presidents at Paphos military airport, in Paphos, Cyprus, 09 March 2026, (EPA)
TT

Greek PM Announces New Mideast War Fallout Relief Measures

Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis speaks during a joint press conference with Cyprus' and France's presidents at Paphos military airport, in Paphos, Cyprus, 09 March 2026, (EPA)
Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis speaks during a joint press conference with Cyprus' and France's presidents at Paphos military airport, in Paphos, Cyprus, 09 March 2026, (EPA)

Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis on Monday announced a raft of additional measures to mitigate the energy cost of the Middle East war.

In a televised address, Mitsotakis said the government had earmarked 300 million euros ($346 million) in relief for households and farmers in April and May, said AFP.

The subsidies are targeted at reducing the cost of diesel fuel, petrol and fertilizer. Part of the initiative is aimed at holding back price hikes in ferry fares to the islands, Mitsotakis said.

Oil prices rose on Monday after the United States and Israel warned at the weekend that the war against Iran -- which has disrupted oil deliveries through the Strait of Hormuz -- would continue for several more weeks.

Greece had already announced a first batch of measures on March 11, capping profit margins on gasoline and foodstuffs for three months.

Mitsotakis on Monday said the government was keeping additional funds on tap.

"Since no one knows how long this war will last, we are obviously keeping reserves in case the global economic situation deteriorates significantly," the conservative leader said.


Russia Opposes Hormuz Blockade, Interfax Reports

The reactor building of Iran's nuclear power plant and electricity poles are seen, at Bushehr, Iran, 750 miles (1,245 kilometers) south of the capital Tehran, Iran, Feb. 27, 2005. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
The reactor building of Iran's nuclear power plant and electricity poles are seen, at Bushehr, Iran, 750 miles (1,245 kilometers) south of the capital Tehran, Iran, Feb. 27, 2005. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
TT

Russia Opposes Hormuz Blockade, Interfax Reports

The reactor building of Iran's nuclear power plant and electricity poles are seen, at Bushehr, Iran, 750 miles (1,245 kilometers) south of the capital Tehran, Iran, Feb. 27, 2005. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
The reactor building of Iran's nuclear power plant and electricity poles are seen, at Bushehr, Iran, 750 miles (1,245 kilometers) south of the capital Tehran, Iran, Feb. 27, 2005. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)

Russia opposes any blockade of the Strait ‌of ‌Hormuz but ‌says ⁠such issues must ⁠be viewed in ⁠the context ‌of ‌the broader ‌global ‌situation, Interfax reported ‌on Monday, citing the ⁠Russian Foreign ⁠Ministry.

In a statement the Ministry said: “We hope the United States acts wisely and not threaten Bushehr nuclear power plant”.

US President Donald Trump and Iranian leaders traded threats over the key Strait of Hormuz Monday, amid threats that the US-Israel war on Iran could last several more weeks.

With the conflict now in its fourth week and showing no sign of ending, the head of the International Energy Agency warned of the worst global energy crisis in decades and said the world economy was under "major threat" from it.

Observers, meanwhile, have also raised the prospect of a surge in inflation that could force central banks to hike interest rates, while the choking off of fertilizer shipments has also fanned concerns about global food security.

The US president on Saturday gave Iran 48 hours to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to shipping or face the destruction of its energy infrastructure.

The ultimatum, made just a day after the US leader said he was considering "winding down" military operations, came as the waterway -- through which a fifth of global oil and gas flows -- remained effectively closed.