MOSCOW, May 7. /TASS/. Iran and the US seem to have taken a significant first step toward concluding the conflict; Kiev has violated the ceasefire it has proposed itself; and Washington has spent quite a fortune on Operation Epic Fury without achieving significant results. These stories topped Thursday’s newspaper headlines across Russia.
Media: Likelihood of US, Iran reaching compromise following suspension of Washington’s operation in Strait of Hormuz
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 - did not fully ease the situation. Experts agree that a complete end to the standoff between Tehran and Washington is still far off.
Washington’s decision should be interpreted as part of a multi-layered political and psychological "game," political analyst Dastan Tokoldoshev told Izvestia. "By demonstratively lowering the level of tension, US President Donald Trump’s team is seeking to convince the international community and Tehran of its goodwill. It also aims to show Congress that it does not want to engage in confrontation without substantial reason while maintaining the intention to defend the country’s foreign policy goals and interests," the expert emphasized.
Even in the event of a diplomatic breakthrough, there is still a likelihood of a resumption of hostilities or of the conflict entering a prolonged deadlock. The same applies to the risk that Tehran will tighten its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz in response to any unfriendly US moves. In this regard, Ivan Bocharov, program manager at the Russian International Affairs Council, pointed out that the Iranians have found an effective tool to influence the global economy and are therefore convinced that their negotiating position is now much stronger than it was before hostilities began in February 2026.
However, the US’ minimum requirements and expectations regarding the transformation of Iran’s nuclear program do not align with Tehran’s, Bocharov noted. "The Iranians do not want to roll back their nuclear program because it is firmly tied to the country's sovereignty. Serious public concessions on the issue of enriched uranium are also not in Tehran’s interest, as this could be perceived as a sign of weakness, including 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 US and Canadian Studies Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, told Vedomosti. According to the expert, the parties’ attempts at diplomacy are preventing them from abruptly resuming strikes, but they do not bring their negotiating positions closer together.
Media: Zelensky violates his own ceasefire
Kiev itself violated the ceasefire that Vladimir Zelensky had previously announced: in the early hours of May 6, the Russian Armed Forces destroyed more than 50 Ukrainian drones, yet Kiev still accused Moscow of breaking the truce. Experts believe Kiev will reject the ceasefire proposed by Russia for Victory Day, while the US is unlikely to be able to prevent this. A return to negotiations on Ukraine in the near future also appears unlikely.
The Russia-announced ceasefire with Ukraine for May 8 and 9 is under serious threat. Media reports indicate that Kiev will not observe it. Moreover, the Ukrainian military has effectively violated the ceasefire declared by Zelensky. Kiev attacked Russia’s Belgorod, Bryansk, Kursk, Zaporozhye and Moscow Regions, as well as Crimea. In total, the Russian Armed Forces intercepted 53 drones. In Crimea, five civilians were killed as a result of drone strikes. Meanwhile, Ukraine attempted to blame Russia for the violations. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry reported alleged strikes on Kharkov and Zaporozhye.
"In other words, according to the Kiev authorities' logic, the Ukrainian armed forces struck civilian targets while Russia violated the ceasefire," military blogger Alexey Zhivov told Rossiyskaya Gazeta. "An information and psychological operation is underway against Moscow, linked to the differing dates for the ceasefire. This ‘game’ will continue," he noted.
According to Russian Presidential Council for Interethnic Relations member Bogdan Bezpalko, Kiev will resort to provocations in order to ultimately accuse Russia of violating the ceasefire. Ukraine acted in a similar manner during Easter. "Kiev violated the ceasefire and tries to blame Russia for it. They attacked first and then blamed Russia, claiming that Ukraine is merely ‘responding’ and cannot maintain the truce. This has happened many times before," he explained to Izvestia.
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 its provocations, Bezpalko emphasized. "This is a small-scale initiative for them, and the US is currently bogged down in the Persian Gulf - they have their own ceasefire there. Therefore, the US will not put much pressure on Zelensky. Even if they have leverage, it’s insignificant. In other words, they’re unlikely to directly threaten to cut off intelligence sharing, for example, just because Ukraine might violate a two-day ceasefire," the expert stressed.
Izvestia: How much Operation Epic Fury cost US
Washington spent approximately $3 billion on Tomahawk cruise missiles alone, and daily costs could have reached $900 million at the peak of the operation against Iran. However, even this large-scale military campaign failed to help the US achieve its key political objectives. Experts believe that the White House underestimated the resilience of Iran’s defenses.
"The initial plan was based on a ‘shock and awe’ strategy," military expert Yury Lyamin recalled. "The calculation was that massive strikes on decision-making centers and the physical elimination of leaders would lead to the collapse of the government. In his addresses, Donald Trump directly called on the population to revolt. However, the primary objective failed: the political system proved resilient. The secondary objective - forcing Iran to capitulate on US terms - was also not achieved: Washington sought a complete abandonment of Iran’s nuclear program and an end to its support for regional proxies. Despite serious damage, Tehran continues to firmly defend its positions in negotiations," the expert told Izvestia.
Experts debate the financial aspect of the operation. Officially, the Pentagon cited a figure of $25 billion. However, independent analysts and CBS News sources estimate the actual costs at $50-60 billion. Furthermore, Senate Republican leader John Thune stated that during peak periods, the US was spending $900 million a day.
According to military expert Dmitry Kornev, while 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, resulted in a significant depletion of their arsenals. "According to open-source data, the US launched more than 1,000 Tomahawk cruise missiles. Each costs between $2 million and $4 million, so it can be assumed that America’s costs for these missiles alone amounted to about $3 billion. In addition, approximately 1,100 JASSM-ER missiles, costing $1.1 million each, were used. Currently, the military only has 1,500 of these missiles remaining. Given a production rate of 860 units per year, this poses risks to defense capabilities," he emphasized.
Izvestia: Europe, China increase their transit trade through Russia
The volume of freight traffic between China and Europe via Russian territory has grown by nearly 50%. Due to threats in the Red Sea and the unstable operation of the Suez Canal, shippers have begun to use the Kazakhstan-Russia-Belarus route more frequently. Although sanctions prohibit the delivery of dual-use goods through 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 impacted shipping through the Suez Canal. Insurance costs and freight rates for transit through this artery have risen sharply, prompting many companies to use the longer route around Africa or seek stable overland alternatives. One of the most convenient options is the transcontinental China-Europe rail route - a vital transport corridor in Eurasia and the backbone of China’s global megaproject, the Belt and Road Initiative. Cargo transits 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 business interest in it, Transport Minister Andrey Nikitin told Izvestia. "At the same time, Russia, Kazakhstan, and Belarus are working on the fastest rail container service between China and Europe. Against the backdrop of threats in the Red Sea and disruptions at the Suez Canal, interest among shippers in this route has surged. In March 2026, container traffic between China and Europe via these countries increased by 45%, from 21,000 to 31,000 TEU," the minister said.
The growth in cargo volume leads directly to increased revenue for Russia 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, earning revenue from infrastructure, terminal handling, rail transport, customs, logistics support, and related services, FTS-Service Group CEO Artyom Valeyev told Izvestia. "If the flow becomes established, this could spur investment in the route, including terminals, border crossings, rolling stock, and digital services," the expert explained.
The main obstacle to increasing transport volumes is the sanctions regime that European countries have imposed on Russia. For example, restrictions can cause payment issues, especially if sanctioned banks are involved. Some European companies may view such a corridor as economically beneficial but posing reputational or legal risks, Valeyev noted.
Vedomosti: North Korea amends Constitution to enshrine its de facto borders
The North Korean authorities have amended the constitution to remove references to reunification with South Korea, according to the draft document. The revised constitution recognizes South Korea as a separate state and defines North Korea’s national borders in their current form for the first time.
The new second article states that North Korea’s territory includes lands 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 boundaries in the Yellow Sea, particularly around the Northern Limit Line - the de facto border between the two Koreas - which remains disputed by Seoul and Pyongyang.
Pyongyang adopted a course toward 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 response to Seoul’s policies toward North Korea, given the widening economic disparity between the two countries.
The amendments to the North Korean constitution are a logical outcome of the leadership's strategy to permanently divide the peninsula into two hostile states, Alexandra Zuyeva, an expert at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, noted. In this way, Pyongyang is attempting to position itself as a serious and independent player in Northeast Asia and on the world stage, the expert said. "Inter-Korean negotiations have recently reached an impasse, and, to be honest, the existence of two Koreas should have been recognized earlier. In theory, both states 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.
TASS is not responsible for the material quoted in these press reviews