Iran’s efforts to rebuild its battered air defense and electronic warfare systems in the wake of a bruising June conflict with Israel have taken a new turn, drawing Belarus into the fray as a potential lifeline for Tehran’s military ambitions. According to Ukraine’s Foreign Intelligence Service, Iran formally requested assistance from Belarus during a high-profile visit by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian to Minsk on August 20, 2025. The trip, which was officially billed as a discussion focused on trade and investment, has now been revealed by Ukrainian sources to have included covert appeals for military-technical support.
The Kyiv Independent and other Ukrainian outlets, citing the country’s intelligence agency, reported that Tehran is actively seeking help from Belarus to restore its air defense capabilities, which were severely damaged during a 12-day war with Israel in June 2025. The intelligence statement was blunt: "Unlike Russia, Belarus is less restricted by sanctions in the military-technical sphere and could become a channel for restoring Iran’s defense capabilities." This revelation has added fuel to already simmering geopolitical tensions in the region.
For context, both Iran and Belarus are close allies of Moscow. Their relationships with Russia have deepened over recent years, particularly as Western sanctions have isolated them further from global markets. Iran has supplied drones and missiles to Russia, which have been used in attacks on Ukraine, while Belarus has allowed Russian forces to use its territory as a staging ground for military operations. This triangular alliance has increasingly drawn scrutiny from Western governments and intelligence agencies, who see it as a growing challenge to international sanctions regimes and regional stability.
The June conflict that set these latest events in motion was a devastating blow to Iran’s defensive infrastructure. Israeli airstrikes on June 13, 2025, reportedly destroyed or disabled about 120 air defense systems—roughly one third of Iran’s total arsenal—including several long-range units. According to Ukrainian intelligence, these strikes were aided by Mossad drone attacks inside Iran, further complicating Tehran’s ability to mount an effective defense. For much of the 12-day conflict, Israeli jets, including advanced F-35s, struck targets across Iran with little resistance from Iranian defenses.
Iran entered the conflict with a patchwork of air defense systems: Russian S-300s, Chinese-made batteries, and its own domestically produced Bavar-373 systems, all supported by shorter-range platforms like Raad, Khordad, and Azarkhsh. However, the integration of these disparate systems was reportedly poor, particularly in terms of radar coordination and electronic warfare capabilities. This lack of cohesion left Iran’s defenses vulnerable to the coordinated and technologically advanced Israeli assault.
Tehran has acknowledged that some of its defenses were damaged during the conflict, but it maintains that pre-positioned reserves were quickly brought online to replace those lost. By August, Iranian state media was touting the rapid rebuilding of its air defense network, claiming that the new systems were "multiple times stronger" than before. Yet, Western and Israeli sources remain skeptical, insisting that Iranian radars and electronic warfare platforms remain compromised and vulnerable to further suppression.
Against this backdrop, Iran’s outreach to Belarus takes on heightened significance. The Ukrainian Foreign Intelligence Service has suggested that Belarus’s unique position—less encumbered by international military-technical sanctions than Russia—makes it an attractive partner for Tehran. "Iran plans to use Belarus as another channel to access sanctioned goods," the agency’s statement asserted. For Belarus, the prospect of participating in projects that go far beyond the officially announced topics of trade and investment could represent both an economic opportunity and a diplomatic risk.
Belarus itself is no stranger to international isolation. The country has been under heavy sanctions and faces sharp censure from the West for its unwavering support of Moscow in the Ukraine war. Still, its less restrictive environment for military-technical cooperation has allowed it to serve as a conduit for goods and expertise that would otherwise be out of reach for sanctioned states like Iran.
Iranian state-linked media have framed President Pezeshkian’s recent visit to Minsk as a defiant gesture against Western pressure, describing it as a "clear message against unilateralism and sanctions." The trip is seen as part of Tehran’s broader “Look East” strategy, which aims to strengthen ties with Russia, China, and other countries facing Western sanctions. For Iran, forging closer bonds with Belarus is not just about rebuilding military hardware—it’s about signaling resilience in the face of international isolation and building a network of mutually supportive partners.
Western observers, however, are less sanguine about the implications of this budding partnership. The prospect of Iran circumventing sanctions by leveraging Belarus’s relatively freer hand in military-technical matters is a source of concern for policymakers in Washington, Brussels, and Jerusalem. There are fears that such cooperation could accelerate Iran’s efforts to restore and even upgrade its air defense and electronic warfare capabilities, potentially altering the balance of power in the region and complicating efforts to contain Tehran’s military ambitions.
Meanwhile, the Ukrainian perspective on this development is tinged with alarm. As a country that has suffered from both Iranian-supplied drones and Belarusian support for Russian military operations, Ukraine views the deepening ties between Tehran and Minsk as a direct threat. Ukrainian intelligence has been quick to publicize Iran’s overtures to Belarus, perhaps in hopes of galvanizing further international action to prevent the transfer of sensitive military technology.
It’s worth noting that the official talks between Pezeshkian and Lukashenko in Minsk were publicly focused on economic cooperation and investment. However, as Ukrainian intelligence has made clear, the real story may lie beneath the surface, where military-technical collaboration is quietly taking shape. The dual-track nature of these discussions underscores the complexity of international diplomacy in an era of sanctions, proxy conflicts, and shifting alliances.
As the dust settles from the June conflict and Iran’s air defense network remains in flux, the world’s attention is now fixed on Minsk. Will Belarus become the crucial conduit for Iran’s military resurgence, or will international pressure stymie these clandestine efforts? For now, the only certainty is that the geopolitical chessboard of Eurasia has grown even more complicated, with new alliances and old rivalries intersecting in unexpected ways.
In the end, the fate of Iran’s air defense—and the broader balance of power in the region—may well hinge on the outcome of these shadowy negotiations in the heart of Belarus.
