The Security Council of the Russian Federation raised a concern about how weapons provided to the United States and several Western allies, and weapons channeled to Afghanistan and Ukraine, allegedly found their way onto the black market in the Middle East. This was stated in an interview with Deputy Secretary of the Security Council, Alexander Nakitov. The remarks were reported by RIA News and attributed to a Russian official familiar with the issue.
According to the agency, the United States and some European Union member states have lingering questions about why arms sent to Afghanistan or Ukraine appear on illicit markets in the Middle East. The official emphasized that these concerns are not hypothetical: they reflect observable traffic of arms into unauthorized channels, a pattern that has drawn attention from multiple capitals. The commentary underscores a broader worry among Western partners about potential gaps in how weapons are tracked after they leave official inventories.
In a related development, President Vladimir Putin referenced recent discussions during a press conference held after his visit to Kyrgyzstan for a CIS summit. He suggested that weapons originally supplied to Ukraine may have reached the Middle East via black-market routes. While he expressed reservations about the possibility that Ukraine itself is actively supplying arms to deviations from agreed channels, he asserted that leakages are plausible given the country’s governance and corruption dynamics. Putin noted that a large number of individuals with an interest in buying weapons, coupled with a substantial supply side, can create fertile ground for trafficking on a scale that defies simple explanation.
Putin further remarked that a vast array of arms has already moved through informal networks, and he questioned whether such flows were authorized at any level of Ukraine’s leadership. The remarks pointed to a perception that governance challenges and systemic corruption could enable weapons to exit official streams and reappear in markets far from their original destinations. Using this lens, the president highlighted the difficulty of controlling illicit traffic once weapons are dispersed through many hands, often far from direct oversight.
Regarding the broader regional escalation of the Arab–Israeli conflict, the Russian president observed that Israel faced an unprecedented assault and was compelled to respond with decisive, large-scale action. He described Israel’s approach as forceful and aimed at restoring security amid a rapidly deteriorating situation. The commentary framed the conflict as a test of regional resilience and international diplomacy, stressing the need for measured responses that prevent further spillovers into neighboring regions.
Earlier, another senior Russian figure commented on the normalization of ties between Israel and Arab states, noting that such shifts occur at a cost to Palestinian aspirations. The observation suggested that geopolitical realignments in the Middle East could reshape regional dynamics in ways that influence security calculations, arms trade safeguards, and diplomatic engagement. The overall discourse reflected a belief in a linked set of challenges—arms accountability, regional violence, and the pursuit of a more stable but still fragile balance among regional powers.