What does the New Conflict Between Iran and Israel Mean for Ukraine?

The new conflict between Iran and Israel increases geopolitical tensions, distracting the world's attention from the Russian war on Ukraine. Kyiv is forced to compete not only for weapons, but also for a place on the global agenda.

Israel's direct attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, Tehran's missile response, and the risk of US involvement all mark the beginning of a new phase of geopolitical confrontation. For the first time in decades, the “shadow war” between Israel and Iran has turned into an open conflict that could change the balance of power in the Middle East – and far beyond.

But at this very moment, Ukraine continues to lose people every day due to Russian attacks on civilians. And while the attention of world capitals, the US Congress, and global media shifts to the Middle East, Kyiv must decide how to remain at the center of the agenda when it is competing not only for weapons but also for the world's attention.

The War for Attention

Ukraine already knows what it's like to be pushed out of the headlines. October 2023, the start of the war in Gaza: the media's focus shifted dramatically, and in the US, the issue of new aid packages for Kyiv was bogged down in domestic political battles. In 2024, the House of Representatives blocked a $60 billion aid package to Ukraine for months. Today, after the missile exchanges between Iran and Israel, the risk of this scenario repeating itself is extremely high.

The media is not infinite. Therefore, the more hot spots there are, the less space there is for Ukraine. The outflow of attention leads to: reduced pressure on politicians, fewer discussions about new aid packages, and a heightened sense of “war fatigue” in Western societies.

The main problem is that when attention disappears, pressure on governments disappears. And without pressure and intensified media attention, there are no decisions. Now the rule of media agenda-setting is working again. The war in Ukraine is becoming “background” noise, and a new “hot spot” in the Middle East is absorbing the emotional resources of viewers and politicians.

And this is perhaps the greatest weapon of autocracies – they wait for democracies to lose focus.

Competition for Weapons: the Front in Israel and in Ukraine

Israel is a close ally of the US. After Iran's large-scale attack, Tel Aviv will need additional air defense systems, missiles, ammunition, and air support. But Ukraine is also claiming these weapons. Even before the escalation, the Ukrainian army faced supply problems: ammunition was worth its weight in gold, and missiles were only available for a few days. What's more, the US even stopped aid for a while, which created even more problems.

Now Israel is joining the queue for help. Will even a giant like the American military-industrial complex be able to supply two fronts at the same time? The question remains open, and most importantly, finding the answer will take time, which for Ukraine is measured in lives. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are already working at full capacity.

This creates direct competition with Ukraine for the same resources, the same budget, and the same attention from Congress. Added to this are: delays in Congress' approval of new aid for Ukraine; growing needs for domestic production, which is not yet capable of satisfying all fronts; the risk of a “budget conflict”: American politicians are more willing to vote for ‘visible’ support for Israel than for “distant” Ukraine.

There is another side to this: Israel's experience in combating drones and missiles could be invaluable to Ukraine. Iron Dome and David's Sling technologies, real-time coordination with allies – all of this has long been of interest to Kyiv.

Moscow and Tehran: an Axis of Common Interests

Iran is not just a new player in CNN headlines. It is a long-standing partner of the Kremlin, and with each escalation in the Middle East, this alliance only grows stronger. It was Iranian Shahed drones that became a symbol of terror over Kyiv. Both regimes – Putin's and the ayatollahs' — seek to undermine the Western order, using wars as a tool of pressure and bargaining.

The more the West gets bogged down in the Middle East, the freer Russia will feel in Eastern Europe. In this context, the conflict between Israel and Iran is not a parallel event, but part of a global competition: autocracy versus democratic alliances.

Moscow's reaction was predictable: rhetorical condemnation of Israel's actions, offers of mediation, and silent hope that the crisis will force the West to return to dialogue with Putin. The Kremlin sees this escalation as a chance for oil prices to rise and, as a result, additional resources for the war in Ukraine. It is also trying to maintain its image as a mediator in the region, while preparing to support Tehran if necessary, in particular by supplying air defense systems or intelligence.

When Israel and Iran are at war and the West is focused on containing Tehran, Moscow gains less attention for its crimes and a political “smokescreen” that allows it to advance on the front lines. War in the Middle East is beneficial to the Kremlin, not only as a distraction but also as a continuation of its anti-Western campaign.

Europe: Support for Israel and Cautious Concern

Despite criticising Israel in the context of Gaza, European countries have this time come out with fairly clear support. For example, the German chancellor called Israel's actions against Iran “the dirty work it is doing for all of us.” However, if the conflict drags on, the scale of the strikes on Iran increases, or the number of casualties rises sharply, Europe's position may change.

The EU's key interest is to prevent Russia from becoming a mediator in this conflict, given Iran's military cooperation with Russia in the war against Ukraine. Europe advocates a return to nuclear negotiations and opposes the spread of the conflict. However, the influence of the E3 (France, Germany, and the UK) remains limited.

Window of Opportunity for Ukraine

Ukraine should not give in to circumstances. On the contrary, it should actively play on the field of geopolitical turbulence. The Israeli campaign could already lead to:

an increase in arms production in the US and NATO, with the possibility of scaling up supplies to Ukraine;

faster decisions in Congress – to “close the Ukrainian issue” before even bigger crises pop up;

stronger solidarity in the West – with the understanding that this isn't about two wars, but one global war against destabilizing autocracies;

Israel's air defense experience – which is priceless. Training, technology, and system integration can strengthen Ukraine's defense.

So Israel's war against Iran is not only a threat – it is also an opportunity. If played correctly.

What should Ukraine do? 

The world has become multipolar – and multi-conflictual. Ukraine needs to seize this opportunity due to this new reality: not only as an object of aid, but also as a subject of initiatives.

Kyiv must remind everyone that its war is not a regional conflict, but part of a global confrontation. It is also worth expanding the circle of allies, seeking support in Asia (Japan, South Korea, Indonesia), Latin America, and Africa (Kenya, South Africa, Nigeria). 

It is certainly important to invest in its own weapons and military-industrial complex in order to reduce dependence in the future, as well as to strengthen diplomacy: to be the voice of the world, where democracy is not a luxury but a necessity.

The world is burning in more than one place. But the fight for Ukraine is also a fight for what this world will be like. Iran, Russia, North Korea, and, to some extent, China are forming an “axis of autocracies” that seeks to change the rules of the game. Therefore, the war in Ukraine is not a local one, but part of a great battle over who will shape the new world order.

Ihor Petrenko, founder of the “United Ukraine” Think Tank, Doctor of Political Sciences