The US-led war on Iran could bring several benefits to Vladimir Putin. Despite the loss of the Russian president’s most important ally in the Middle East, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, there are several reasons why President Donald Trump‘s actions actually boost Russia.

At the most basic level, it reinforces Putin’s long-held belief that global politics is governed by force, not rules. If Washington argues that Iran posed an unacceptable threat and that military action was necessary, it echoes the logic Putin used to justify invading Ukraine. From the Kremlin’s perspective, it strengthens the idea that great powers are entitled to act decisively in their own security interests—even if the rest of the world objects.

The conflict also shifts attention away from Ukraine. As U.S. officials juggle crises in the Middle East, diplomatic energy and political focus inevitably move away from pressuring Moscow. Any slowdown or collapse in peace talks would suit the Kremlin, especially as the war drags into its fifth year.

Economically, instability in the Gulf could push global oil prices higher. That would directly benefit Russia, whose war machine is funded by energy revenues. If supplies from the region are disrupted, major buyers such as India and China may turn even more to Russian crude, boosting Moscow’s income despite sanctions.

At the same time, a widening conflict could strain European unity, creating divisions that Russia has long sought to exploit. And if the U.S. becomes bogged down, the biggest winner may be Putin.

1. Reinforces Putin’s Hard-Power Worldview

Putin has long argued that global politics is shaped by force, not rules. If the U.S. openly pushes for regime change in Iran—or treats its leaders as fair targets—it strengthens his claim that power decides what is acceptable. The Iran action came one month after Trump removed Nicolas Maduro from power in Venezuela with a clinical military strike.

Russia’s attempt to remove Volodymyr Zelensky at the start of the Ukraine war was widely condemned. But if toppling hostile leaders becomes more normalized, the Kremlin can argue it was simply playing by the same rules.

Using that logic, Putin can also defend his invasion of Ukraine. If Washington says Iran posed an intolerable security threat, Moscow can repeat its claim that NATO expansion created an “unacceptable threat” on Russia’s border.

2. Focus Diverted From Ukraine

As missiles fly in the Gulf and American casualties mount, attention in Washington is diverted. There are only so many crises the U.S. can handle at once. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said Russia remains “open” to U.S.-brokered peace talks on Ukraine, even as sources told Bloomberg Moscow could walk away if Kyiv refuses to give up territory in the Donbas.

The Middle East conflict is already affecting the talks. Volodymyr Zelensky has said the timing and location of the next round will depend on the security situation and the level of “real diplomatic possibilities.” He had suggested Abu Dhabi as a likely venue in early March. But the United Arab Emirates has since been caught up in hostilities after U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, throwing plans into doubt.

With U.S. officials focused on both Iran and Ukraine, momentum may slow. For Moscow, a distracted Washington is an advantage.

Moreover, officials warn that key U.S. missile and air-defense stockpiles have already been heavily reduced by recent operations. The Pentagon faces a difficult choice: the same systems needed to protect U.S. bases from possible Iranian attacks are also being used to defend Ukraine and support Israel. If the conflict in the Middle East continues, these limited supplies could be stretched even further, forcing Washington to decide where to send scarce air-defense weapons.

3. Could Supercharge Russia’s Oil Revenues

The most immediate and tangible benefit to Moscow from rising tensions in the Middle East is economic. Global oil prices have climbed amid fears of lasting supply disruptions through the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint that carries roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil exports. Markets have already seen Brent crude approach $80 per barrel, and some analysts warn that if tanker traffic is seriously disrupted, prices could move toward $100 or higher. “$100+ oil per barrel soon,” Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev gloated on X.

Higher oil prices directly increase Russian revenues at a time when energy income has been squeezed by sanctions and weaker demand. Russia exports nearly 5 million barrels of crude a day and earns significantly more when global prices rise, even if it has to sell at discounted rates. Kremlin propagandist Vladimir Solovyov was explicit: “For our budget [the attack on Iran] is a big plus.” He told his viewers that if Iranian oil fields are hit, Russia could become “one of the few remaining [oil] producing countries” and gain “a trump card in this complex game.”

If Gulf supplies are disrupted—and with Venezuelan oil also affected—major buyers such as India and China may turn even more to Russian crude. In that case, rising prices would not only boost Moscow’s income but also weaken the impact of Western sanctions, helping fund Russia’s war effort in Ukraine.

4. European Leaders Undermined

European leaders are already scrambling to recalibrate their policy toward Iran. America’s key allies, with the obvious exception of Israel, were not properly consulted before U.S. strikes began. The sense of being sidelined has exposed fresh strains inside NATO.

Trump has publicly criticized U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer over his stance on Iran, saying he was “very disappointed” in him.

Any prolonged conflict risks deepening divisions within the alliance, eroding the trans-Atlantic unity that was carefully built over Ukraine. Visible disunity inside NATO—confusion, public disagreements and diplomatic back-pedaling—is precisely the kind of fractured Western front that Moscow has long sought to exploit.

5. It Creates Openings if the U.S. Falters

If the conflict drags on or the U.S. fails to achieve clear results, Trump’s credibility in the Gulf would suffer. American influence in the region is built on the idea that it can act quickly and decisively. A long, messy war—or continued Iranian retaliation—would raise doubts among regional partners about Washington’s strategy and reliability. Gulf states worried about instability might push the U.S. to scale back rather than escalate.

Any sign that American power is weakening would give Moscow and Beijing an opportunity to expand their influence, deepen ties, and present themselves as alternative partners in the region.

What Russia Stands To Lose

Iran has been Russia’s closest partner in the Middle East. Moscow has bought Iranian weapons for its war in Ukraine and signed a 20-year strategic partnership deal with Tehran last year. Weakening Iran could upend that relationship.

For years, Moscow and Beijing have tried to build a loose bloc to challenge American power. A clear U.S. victory would damage that narrative. After Khamenei’s death, Putin offered “deep condolences” and condemned a “cynical murder,” showing support but also highlighting Russia’s limits. When missiles fall, Moscow can offer words, not protection.

For the Kremlin, the ideal outcome is not Iranian triumph but American entanglement. A prolonged Middle East crisis that absorbs U.S. attention, drains resources and unsettles allies would validate Putin’s hard-power worldview and ease pressure on his war in Ukraine.

In that sense, the greatest gift may not be territory or alliances, but time.

As a Newsweek member, we’re offering this service to you for free. You can sign up below, or read more about how it works here. Let’s talk!