(LONDON) – Credible reports suggest that Moscow has supplied military intelligence to Iran to help identify United States military targets in the Middle East, according to comments by former British diplomat Cormac Smith during a discussion on the Times Radio programme Frontline.
Smith said information reportedly passed by Russia included sensitive details about the locations of American warships and aircraft in the region.
“There have been very credible reports that Russia has been providing military intelligence to the Iranians to target US targets,” Smith said.
The claims come amid growing geopolitical tensions involving Russia, Iran and Western allies during the continuing war in Ukraine.
Smith criticised the response of US President Donald Trump, noting that Trump had previously indicated he did not believe such intelligence sharing had taken place despite information reportedly provided by American security services.
According to Smith, Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff said he had asked Russian dictator Vladimir Putin about the issue and accepted the denial given by the Kremlin.
Smith also argued that support from Washington for Ukraine had been significantly reduced in recent months.
“I do believe that Trump has not maybe stopped completely but he has pulled back support of Ukraine to a massive extent,” he said.
He added that the United States had moved from directly supplying weapons to Kyiv to selling arms to European allies that then transfer them to Ukraine.
Smith suggested that deliveries of some critical weapons systems had also been delayed.
“There have been many instances where Ukrainians feel that critical weapons and munitions for anti drone and anti aircraft technology in particular have been slow walked into Ukraine and into Europe for Ukraine at critical moments,” he said.
The discussion also examined the wider geopolitical context, including tensions involving Iran and the Middle East.
According to figures cited during the programme, the United States recorded about 170 attacks in the past year against American personnel, interests and allies in the region by Iran or Iranian backed groups.
Concerns have also been raised about possible technological cooperation between Russia and Iran.
Participants in the discussion noted that Russian components had already been identified in Iranian Shahed drones that struck the British sovereign base area in Cyprus.
There have also been persistent concerns that Moscow could share advanced military technologies with Tehran, including potentially nuclear related capabilities.
Smith said the Iranian government remained one of the most repressive regimes in the world and argued that international concerns about Iran’s nuclear ambitions were justified.
“There is nobody who would celebrate the downfall of the Iranian regime more than myself,” he said.
He described widespread human rights abuses by the Iranian authorities including the execution of individuals for sexual orientation and the imprisonment of women activists.
However Smith warned that military action against Iran required careful strategic planning.
“I do feel that a war on Iran was justified,” he said, while arguing that current actions appeared to be tactical rather than part of a wider long term strategy.
“This strikes me as tactics without strategy,” he added.
Smith compared the situation with the Iraq war, warning that major interventions without a clear long term plan risk repeating earlier mistakes.
He also warned that civilian casualties during military operations could strengthen support for the Iranian government among parts of the population.
“When the family is attacked from outside most people close ranks. It is human nature,” he said.
The discussion then turned back to Ukraine and to the international response to Russia’s invasion.
Smith highlighted a recent commentary by journalist Edward Lucas published in The Times, which argued that Western governments had failed to fully use the time gained by Ukraine’s resistance.
“The Ukrainians have been fighting, bleeding and dying not just to protect their own country but to protect the borders of Europe,” Smith said.
He recalled an earlier conversation with a senior British diplomat in 2016 while training Ukrainian ambassadors, when the diplomat suggested that European governments were uncomfortable with Kyiv’s claim that it was defending the wider continent.
According to Smith, Ukraine’s struggle has effectively bought time for European nations to strengthen their own defences.
“The Ukrainians have given us four years with their blood,” he said.
“They have given us four years to rearm.”
Smith said warnings about the threat posed by Russia had been repeatedly delivered by countries closer to the conflict, including the Baltic states, Finland and Poland.
“They have told us what Russia is really about and that they will come for the rest of us,” he said.
He added that future conflict might not necessarily involve conventional military invasion but could include hybrid or grey zone warfare.
Smith warned that the United Kingdom’s own defence readiness had declined significantly.
He said Britain’s army had shrunk to levels not seen for generations and criticised what he described as a lack of transparency from political leaders about the country’s military preparedness.
“We are in a very perilous state in the United Kingdom,” he said.
Smith argued that governments would need to make difficult political decisions to rebuild defence capabilities and that voters must be fully informed about the scale of the challenge.
“Sacrifices are going to have to be made to allow us to spend on the military the way we have to,” he said.
“If the British people are not told the truth they cannot be expected to support those choices.”
