OFBSLF:
In the words of a certain tv programme, "yes, but no, but yes but no."
The point here is that the current Iranian regime certainly has been supporting Hezbollah in Lebanon and insurgents of various stripes in Iraq and Afghanistan, and probably Hamas in the Occupied Territories as an
asymmetric effort to counter what it sees as "Western / Zionist" hegemony in the Middle East, and more importantly what it sees as a series of attacks against Iran dating back to the 1979 "Islamic" Revolution.
This, in Iranian demonology, is directly traceable to the "Great Satan" of the USA, stemming from the US trade embargo, US actions against non-US firms trading with Iran (see, e.g.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3043498.stm or
http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/1999/issue3/jv3n3a5.html), and (again in Iranian eyes), US-sponsored effort to dismantle the Iranian Nuclear Programme. Against this, an asymmetric strategy such as the one that they've been employing is proportionate, sensible and cheap. (Especially since the US/UK have so thoughtfully put so many of their troops on the ground next door in Iraq and Afghanistan).
NONE OF WHICH EXCUSES Iran's actions in law.
But when the Tehran regime is faced with what it perceives - and can present to its' long suffering populace - as an existential threat to the State, then getting the equipment to deal symmetrically with the "threat" of an attack on its nuclear facilities is, seen from Tehran, sensible and proportionate.
So it is at least explicable that Tehran should turn to Moscow for FLANKER and MIDAS with open chequebook, even if we don't like it.
And for the conspiracy theorists out there, isn't it interesting that this report appeared in Israel just at the time the Israelis were being visited by Condi Rice and discussing a new weapons package....
Just my 0.02...
S41