"...For the Kremlin, the stability of Tehran's regime is priority one..."

Forbes:

"... Those close to the White House are convinced that the danger of a nuclear Iran is exaggerated. The idea that Iran will be more responsible when in possession of a nuclear bomb has become quite popular among some who offer advice to the Obama administration.

Another "progressive" approach suggests that the Iranian crisis is more of an Israel-related issue of limited concern to the U.S. According to this view, Tehran, with its anti-Israeli rhetoric and its proxies in Syria and Lebanon, presents a clear and imminent danger to the Jewish state, but not to Washington. The situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, we are told, is of more vital importance to the U.S. than anything else happening in the Middle East.

And last but not least calculation suggests that possible air strike on Iran will trigger a short but full scale war in the region causing not only numerous casualties but a significant spike in oil and gas prices. In this case, the U.S. together with China and Europe will be seriously affected......

Despite all the Kremlin's hypocritical statements, Putin is largely unafraid of a nuclear-happy Iran. ...... Kremlin's eagerness to support the recent U.N. sanctions package. On one hand, the sanctions largely did not prohibit any country from selling arms to Iran. On another it did not put an embargo on export of gasoline and spare parts for Iran's few and outdated oil refineries making the U.S. efforts absolutely toothless.

Despite bitter statements toward Moscow coming from Tehran after the approval of the U.N. sanctions, there is no reason to believe that the Russian-Iranian cooperation went south. Just last week Kremlin announced loading nuclear fuel into the Iranian reactor of the Bushehr nuclear power plant. In addition to this, Moscow is always ready to raise the issue of selling the S300 missile defense complexes to Iran, especially when Kremlin is unhappy with the White House behavior.

Thus, the most important issue for the Russian leadership is the stability of the current regime in Iran. The possibility of pro-Western regime change in the natural-gas-rich Iran makes the Kremlin much more uncomfortable. It would mean a rapid end to Moscow's energy monopoly in Europe. If this scenario comes to pass, it will be an event equal in importance to the liberation of Eastern and Central Europe from Soviet occupation in the 1990s.

To add insult to injury, Russian budget revenues, half of which come from oil and gas, will suffer greatly, and Gazprom, the state-run gas monopolist and cash cow for the Russian ruling elite, will surely shrink.

The goal of U.S. foreign policy should not be to offer an olive branch to anyone, like a toddler who's happy to embrace strangers with a smile on his face. The goal is to find a balance between the carrot and the stick, which the current administration in Washington doesn't seem to understand."