Introduction: One of the major challenges in international politics in the new millennium has been the evolving relationship between Iran and the West, particularly regarding Iran's pursuit of nuclear capabilities. Russia's role in this context has been closely monitored by Western powers. As a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and a participant in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Russian Federation has emerged as a key player in power mediation in the Iranian nuclear issue. Since the beginning of the Iranian nuclear crisis in 2002, Russia's role as a mediator has been pivotal and unpredictable. Moscow has alternately supported Iran, backed Western actions against it, particularly at the United Nations, or adopted a neutral stance depending on circumstances. This study examines Russia's diplomatic maneuvers on the Iran's nuclear issue from 2002 to 2022, covering the initial crisis and the geopolitical shifts resulting from the Ukraine war.

Research question: How can one explain Russian mediation model and its fluctuating positions in mediation strategies during the nuclear crisis, especially in terms of geopolitical interests, power dynamics and its implications for international relations?

Research hypothesis: Mediation, often seen as a solution, serves as a strategic tool for a "great power" like Russia to exert influence and act as an "unpredictable mediator" rather than actually resolving disputes.

Methodology and theoretical framework: The present study evaluates the hypothesis with an analytical approach and using qualitative methods, based on the theory of conditional realism. Conditional realism emphasizes the inherent nature of international conflicts and believes that the underlying causes of such disputes are often resistant to direct resolution. In this context, neo-realism believes that mediation is the most practical and predictable mechanism for managing international conflicts. Applying this theoretical perspective, this research aims to examine the complexities of international mediation and its effectiveness in addressing ongoing geopolitical tensions. Furthermore, this study will analyze case studies to demonstrate the practical implications of mediation strategies, evaluate their outcomes and the factors influencing successful conflict resolution. This comprehensive review will enhance our understanding of the dynamics in international relations and the vital role of mediation in fostering stability and cooperation among conflicting parties.

Results and discussion: The findings of this research indicate that mediation, as a form of power brokering, is the most effective framework for analyzing Russia's role as an "unpredictable broker" in the Iranian nuclear case. Russia's mediation efforts began between 2002 and 2005, after the revelation about Iran's nuclear facilities. This intervention prompted Tehran to adopt policies more in line with the West and not to severe its relations with the West. During periods of heigh tensions, Russia used its veto power in the UN Security Council to block sanctions against Iran. From 2006 to 2010, Russian mediation exhibited characteristics of “unpredictable mediation” as its loyalties fluctuated. In 2006, Russia supported the West in passing Resolution 1737 while simultaneously opposing some aspects of the resolution. In 2009, Russia worked with the P5+1 group to find a comprehensive solution. However, when Iran showed reluctance and distrust towards Moscow, Russia supported tougher sanctions and supported resolution 2010. Russia's unpredictable diplomatic maneuvers were primarily aimed at protecting its national interests. Between 2011 and 2014, Moscow expressed a desire to improve relations with Iran, acknowledging that continued sanctions would be ineffective. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov proposed a step-by-step cooperation plan between the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran. However, the European Union's decision to impose further sanctions in 2012, coupled with Tehran's cooperative stance, forced the P5+1 to begin new negotiations. Moscow used these talks to address its concerns with the West, particularly about the U.S. anti-missile defense system in Eastern Europe. During this period, Russia maintained its role as an unpredictable mediator, oscillating between supporting the West and Iran to demonstrate its balancing influence and secure its national interests. After the election of Hassan Rouhani as Iran’s President in 2013, Russia continued its mediating efforts, particularly in response to the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, which intensified pressure on Iran through the reimposition of sanctions. Moscow's response included criticism of the U.S. position and alignment with Iran’s. With the arrival of President Biden's administration, Russia welcomed the White House's interest in reviving the nuclear deal and increasingly highlighted its strategic role in the ongoing negotiations.

Conclusion: With the outbreak of the conflict in Ukraine in February 2022, Russia, which had previously demonstrated significant willingness to participate in negotiations aimed at reviving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), strategically leveraged its strong ties with Iran. Russia has sought to strengthen its geopolitical position by using the Iranian nuclear issue as a trump card in its confrontation with the West. Historically, since the beginning of the Iranian nuclear crisis, Russia has consistently opposed the prospect of Iran acquiring weapons-grade nuclear technology, highlighting its dual role in supporting and regulating Iran's nuclear capabilities. As a result, Russia has emerged as a pivotal actor in the power dynamics surrounding this issue and has positioned itself as a key mediator in the negotiations. As a major global power, Russia, has sought to exert its influence on interactions between Iran and Western countries, aiming to preserve its national interests while navigating a complex and often unpredictable landscape. The "Russian model of brokering" in the context of the Iranian nuclear case is an example of the concept that mediation, while a valuable tool in international diplomacy, is not without its limitations and challenges. This situation highlights the complex interplay of national interests, regional power dynamics and the inherent complexities of diplomatic negotiations, ultimately reinforcing the understanding that effective mediation requires not only willingness but also a precise understanding of the geopolitical context.