MOSCOW / WASHINGTON — Russia confirmed Friday through Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov that it is “in dialogue with representatives of the Iranian leadership” during the ongoing U.S.-Israeli military conflict with Iran, a statement described by the Kremlin as routine diplomatic communication, by U.S. intelligence officials as confirmation of active intelligence sharing, and by the Kremlin’s own body language as “the face a person makes when they are technically telling the truth and fully aware of it.”
The confirmation came after CNN, the Washington Post, and NPR all reported, citing multiple U.S. intelligence sources, that Russia has been providing Iran with satellite imagery showing the locations and movements of American troops, ships, and aircraft — the kind of real-time battlefield intelligence that tends to make the people whose locations are being shared feel a certain way about it.
“We are in dialogue,” Peskov told reporters, reading from prepared remarks with the serene demeanor of a man who has spent many years saying things that are technically sentences. “We will certainly continue this dialogue. Russia speaks with Iranian leaders. Russia condemned the attacks on Iran.”
What Russia did not say: that it is not providing satellite targeting imagery. What Russia also did not say: anything that would require it to not provide satellite targeting imagery. What Russia did say, notably, was “dialogue” — a word that contains within it approximately as much information as its speaker intends it to contain, which in diplomatic contexts is generally the point.
The Intelligence In Question
U.S. officials describe the Russian intelligence being shared with Iran as primarily overhead satellite imagery — the kind produced by Russia’s sophisticated reconnaissance constellation, which has been tracking U.S. military assets in the region with the focused attention of a party who has a strategic interest in knowing where those assets are.
The intelligence is not covered by any mutual defense treaty. Russia and Iran signed a strategic partnership agreement last year, but it does not obligate military assistance. It does, however, create the kind of relationship in which one partner passes another partner information about where their mutual adversary’s aircraft carrier currently is, which is a form of assistance that technically falls below the treaty threshold while being, in the assessment of U.S. naval commanders, extremely relevant to their continued operational security.
“It’s not a mutual defense pact,” confirmed one defense analyst at the Atlantic Council, who then paused for several seconds before adding: “I want to be clear that ‘it’s not technically a mutual defense pact’ and ‘it’s not a problem’ are two sentences that can coexist without implying each other.”
The Kremlin’s Communication Strategy
Supposedly News would like to take a moment to appreciate, purely as a craft matter, the architecture of the Kremlin’s response.
The statement confirms dialogue. It does not deny satellite sharing. It notes that Russia condemned the attacks on Iran — which is true, and which is not the same as saying Russia has not subsequently decided to help Iran respond to those attacks, since condemnation and assistance are not mutually exclusive activities. It invokes the strategic partnership without specifying what the partnership includes. It answers the press conference question without answering the underlying question.
“It’s actually very clean work,” said Dr. Aleksei Volkov, a professor of political communication at Charles University in Prague, with what sounded like reluctant admiration. “They said something. The something they said is true. The something they said contains no information. It is a sentence-shaped object. I’ve been studying this for twenty years and it is genuinely consistent form.”
The American Response
The White House said it was “aware of the reports” and “monitoring the situation closely,” a phrase that contains the same quantity of actionable content as the Kremlin’s statement, which may or may not be a coincidence.
The Pentagon said it was “assessing” the intelligence sharing reports. The State Department said it was “deeply concerned.” Three unnamed senior officials told three different outlets three variations of “this is serious” that did not overlap in any specific detail.
The one concrete action announced Friday was a phone call, which had not yet occurred at press time but which officials described as “forthcoming” and “frank” — a diplomatic adjective that in practice means the call will happen, both parties will say what they already said publicly, and a readout will be issued using the word “constructive” in a way that satisfies no one.
Russia has not commented further. The satellites, U.S. intelligence officials confirm, are still overhead. They continue to be overhead right now. They were overhead while you were reading this sentence.
Supposedly News asked the Kremlin for clarification on whether “dialogue” includes satellite imagery. The Kremlin has not responded. We are in dialogue about it.