MOSCOW, 7 May: Iran and the US appear to have taken an important first step towards a conclusion of the conflict. Kiev has violated the ceasefire it proposed, and Washington has spent a considerable fortune on Operation Epic Fury without achieving significant results. The news made headlines across Russia on Thursday.
Likelihood of compromise between US and Iran after Washington suspends Hormuz Strait operation
Iran and the US are close to signing a symbolic memorandum on the cessation of hostilities. The document is expected to resolve a number of contentious issues and pave the way for a long-term settlement. However, the situation remains fragile and largely uncertain. The White House's decision to temporarily suspend Operation Project Freedom, which was launched to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz, has not entirely calmed the situation. Experts agree that a complete end to the standoff between Tehran and Washington is still a long way off.
„Washington's decision should be interpreted as part of a multi-layered political and psychological „game“,“ said political analyst Dastan Tokoldoshev. „By demonstratively lowering the tension level, US President Donald Trump's team is trying to convince the international community and Tehran of its goodwill. At the same time, it wants to show Congress that it does not want to engage in confrontation without a serious reason, while maintaining its intention to defend the country's foreign policy goals and interests,“ the expert stressed.
Even in the event of a diplomatic breakthrough, there is still the likelihood of renewed hostilities or the conflict settling into a prolonged stalemate. The same applies to the risk that Tehran will tighten its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz in response to any hostile US action. In this regard, Ivan Bocharov, program manager at the Russian Council on Foreign Affairs, pointed out that the Iranians have found an effective tool to influence the global economy and therefore believe that their negotiating position is much stronger now than before the hostilities began in February 2026.
However, the minimum requirements and expectations of the US regarding the transformation of Iran's nuclear programme do not coincide with Tehran's demands, Bocharov noted. „The Iranians do not want to curb their nuclear program because it is firmly linked to the country's sovereignty. Serious public concessions on the issue of enriched uranium are also not in Tehran's interest, as it could be perceived as a sign of weakness, even by regional partners,“ the expert said.
However, the minimum requirements and expectations of the US regarding the transformation of Iran's nuclear programme do not coincide with Tehran's demands, Bocharov noted. „The Iranians do not want to curb their nuclear program because it is firmly linked to the country's sovereignty. Serious public concessions on the issue of enriched uranium are also not in Tehran's interest, as it could be perceived as a sign of weakness, even by regional partners,“ the expert said. At this stage, there is no prospect of reaching an agreement between the US and Iran on key issues, Pavel Koshkin, a senior researcher at the Institute of American and Canadian Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, told Vedomosti. According to the expert, the parties' diplomatic attempts prevent them from suddenly resuming strikes, but do not bring their negotiating positions closer together.
Zelensky is violating his own ceasefire
Kiev itself violated the ceasefire previously announced by Vladimir Zelensky: in the early hours of 6 May, Russian armed forces destroyed more than 50 Ukrainian drones, yet Kiev still accused Moscow of violating the ceasefire. Experts believe that Kiev will reject the ceasefire proposed by Russia for Victory Day, while the US is unlikely to be able to prevent it. A return to negotiations on Ukraine in the near future also seems unlikely. Russia announced a ceasefire with Ukraine for May 8 and 9, which was observed. Media reports suggest that Kiev will not abide by it. Moreover, the Ukrainian military has effectively violated the ceasefire announced by Zelensky. Kiev has attacked the Russian regions of Belgorod, Bryansk, Kursk, Zaporozhye and Moscow, as well as Crimea. In total, the Russian armed forces intercepted 53 drones. In Crimea, five civilians have been killed as a result of drone attacks. Ukraine, meanwhile, has tried to blame Russia for the violations. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry reported on alleged strikes on Kharkiv and Zaporozhye.
„In other words, according to the logic of the Kiev authorities, the Ukrainian armed forces attacked civilian targets while Russia violated the ceasefire,“ military blogger Alexei Zhivov told the Russian daily Rossiyskaya Gazeta. „There is an information and psychological operation against Moscow, coupled with different ceasefire terms. This ‚game‘ will continue,“ he noted. According to Bogdan Bezpalk, a member of the Russian Presidential Council for Interethnic Relations, Kiev will resort to provocations to eventually accuse Russia of violating the ceasefire. Ukraine acted similarly during Easter. „Kiev has violated the ceasefire and is trying to blame Russia. First they attacked and then accused Russia, claiming that Ukraine was only ‚reacting‘ and could not keep the ceasefire. This has happened many times,“ he explained to the Izvestia daily.
Although Trump supported the idea of a ceasefire on May 8 and 9, the US is unlikely to be able to force Ukraine to abandon the provocations, Bezpalko stressed. „For them, this is a small-scale initiative and the US is currently stuck in the Persian Gulf - they have their own ceasefire there. Therefore, the US will not put much pressure on Zelensky. Even if they have influence, it is insignificant. In other words, they are unlikely to directly threaten to stop sharing intelligence, for example, just because Ukraine might violate the two-day ceasefire,“ the expert stressed.
How much did Epic Fury cost the U.S.
Washington has spent approximately $3 billion on Tomahawk cruise missiles alone, and the daily cost could reach $900 million at the height of the operation against Iran. But even this massive military campaign has not helped the US achieve its key policy objectives. Experts believe that the White House has underestimated the resilience of Iran's defences.
„The original plan was based on a ‚shock and awe‘ strategy,“ recalled military expert Yuri Lyamin. „The calculation was that massive strikes on decision centres and physical elimination of leaders would lead to the collapse of the government. In his speeches, Donald Trump directly called on the population to revolt. But the primary objective failed: the political system proved to be resilient. The secondary objective - to force Iran to surrender on American terms - has also not been achieved: Washington has sought a complete abandonment of Iran's nuclear programme and an end to the support of regional proxies. Despite the serious damage, Tehran continues to defend its position firmly in the negotiations,“ the expert said.
Experts discuss the financial side of the operation. The Pentagon has officially quoted a figure of $25 billion. But independent analysts and CBS News sources estimate the actual cost at $50-60 billion. Further, Senate Republican Leader John Thune said that during peak periods the US was spending $900 million a day. According to military expert Dmitry Kornev, although all 60 of Iran's surface vessels and submarines were declared destroyed, it came at a high financial cost to the Americans and, more importantly, led to a significant depletion of their arsenal.
„According to open source data, the US has launched more than 1,000 Tomahawk cruise missiles. Each of these missiles costs between $2 million and $4 million, so it can be assumed that the US cost of these missiles alone was about $3 billion. In addition, approximately 1 100 JASSM-ER missiles costing $1.1 million have been used. Currently, the Army has only 1 500 of these missiles. With an annual production of 860, this poses a risk to defence capabilities,“ he stressed.
Izvestia: Europe and China increase transit trade through Russia
The volume of freight traffic between China and Europe via Russian territory increased by almost 50 %. Due to threats in the Red Sea and the unstable operation of the Suez Canal, shippers have started to use the Kazakhstan-Russia-Belarus route more frequently. Although sanctions prohibit the supply of dual-use goods via Russia to Europe, this does not mean a complete ban on logistics via Russian territory.The war in the Middle East has effectively halted traffic in the Strait of Hormuz and affected shipping through the Suez Canal. Insurance costs and freight rates for shipping through this artery have soared, forcing many companies to use the longer route around Africa or seek stable land alternatives. One of the most convenient options is the China-Europe transcontinental rail route - a vital transport corridor in Eurasia and the backbone of China's global megaproject, the Belt and Road Initiative. Freight traffic passes through three countries: Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus.
„On average, this route is two to three times faster than the Suez Canal route, which explains the growing global commercial interest in it,“ Transport Minister Andrei Nikitin told Izvestiya. „At the same time, Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus are working on the fastest rail container transport between China and Europe. Against the backdrop of threats in the Red Sea and disruptions in the Suez Canal, shippers“ interest in this route has soared. In March 2026, container traffic between China and Europe via these countries increased by 45 %, from 21,000 to 31,000 TEUs," the minister said.
The growth in freight volumes leads directly to an increase in Russia's revenues through its main railway company, Russian Railways, as well as smaller players. Moscow has the opportunity to strengthen its role as the operator of the Eurasian corridor and earn revenue from infrastructure, terminal handling, rail transport, customs, logistics support and related services, Artyom Valeev, CEO of FTS-Service Group, told Izvestiya. „If the flow stabilizes, it could spur investment in the route, including terminals, border crossings, rolling stock and digital services,“ the expert explained.
The main obstacle to increasing the volume of transport is the sanctions regime imposed by European countries on Russia. For example, restrictions can cause problems with payments, especially if sanctioned banks are involved. Some European companies may find such a corridor economically beneficial, but it poses reputational or legal risks, Valeev noted.
North Korea amends constitution to enshrine its de facto borders
North Korean authorities have amended the constitution to remove references to reunification with South Korea, the draft document said. The revised constitution recognises South Korea as a separate state and for the first time defines North Korea's national borders in their current form. The new second article states that North Korea's territory includes territory bordering China and Russia to the north and South Korea to the south, along with adjacent territorial waters and airspace. However, the revised constitution does not define the maritime boundary in the Yellow Sea, in particular around the Northern Limit Line - the de facto border between the two Koreas - which is still disputed between Seoul and Pyongyang.
Pyongyang is heading towards a definitive break with South Korea in 2023. Since then, the country has undergone a restructuring of its political and ideological structures, Ilya Dyachkov, an associate professor at MGIMO University, told Vedomosti. According to the expert, the North Korean leadership's rejection of reunification is a reaction to Seoul's policy towards North Korea, given the deepening economic inequality between the two countries.
The changes to the North Korean constitution are the logical outcome of the leadership's strategy to permanently divide the peninsula into two hostile states, noted Alexandra Zueva, an expert at the National Research University's School of Economics. In this way, Pyongyang is trying to present itself as a serious and independent player in Northeast Asia and on the world stage, the expert said. „The inter-Korean negotiations have recently reached an impasse and frankly, the existence of the two Koreas should have been recognized earlier. In theory, the two countries will now be able to coexist, just as the two Germanies did during the Cold War. This potentially opens up opportunities for renewed negotiations between Seoul and Pyongyang,“ she noted.
General News Agency is not responsible for material quoted in these press reviews.
TASS/gnews.cz
Czech 
English 
Spanish 
French 
Italian 
Russian 
Chinese 
German