Tehran – Recent editor, Ahman et Mruz dealt with important but often overlooked aspects of state deterrence amid escalating regional tensions and continuing conflicts, as well as the continuing conflict between Iran and Israel.
While much attention is paid to military power, missile capabilities, geopolitical manipulation and regional alliances, another powerful deterrent is that it is close to home. It’s people’s satisfaction and trust. Deterrence is not limited to weapons and strategies. It also unfolds within the heart and morale of the population. History consistently shows that nations bound by solidarity and trust in their leadership are showing great resilience in times of crisis. Public satisfaction manifested as a widespread acceptance of the legitimacy of government defence policies promotes national unity and strength. The importance of an engaged, hopeful, economically secure population cannot be overstated as Iran navigates one of the most sensitive geopolitical periods in recent history. No missiles or military strategies provide more lasting security than citizens who believe in the direction of the country. To this end, economic revitalization, fighting corruption, and rebuilding public trust is not merely a domestic concern, but a strategic order. These pillars are essential to strengthening the unity of the state and Iran’s position in negotiations with external forces.
Khorasan: Iran, an intersection where seizes opportunities or repeats past trade policies
In a recent analysis, Khorasan examined Iran’s sustained struggle to capitalize on the vast economic potential offered by its Persian Gulf neighbours. For the past decade, Iran’s trade ties with members of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council remained limited. This is a consequence that cannot simply be attributed to fluctuations in natural trade or market dynamics. Structural obstacles, including the private sector that are not equipped to meet the specific demands of underdeveloped infrastructure and the local market, have significantly expanded the trade gap between Iran and these countries. These factors reflect systematic shortcomings rather than circumstantial limitations. Despite its cultural relations with the region, Iran has yet to secure a meaningful share in the booming market of the Persian Gulf. This missed opportunity not only represents a loss of economic value, but also hampers the country’s broader strategic position in the region. To reverse this trend, Iran must prioritize practical economic reforms, invest in trade infrastructure, and develop a more competitive and responding private sector. Otherwise there is a risk remaining on the bystanders of one of the world’s most dynamic economic corridors. While Turkey, India and China are expanding their economic impact in the region, Iran is still repeatedly trading with one or two partners in the Persian Gulf region. If new approaches are adopted at the governance level, diversify, promote infrastructure, and redefine relationships with neighbors, it is expected that Iran’s share of opportunities in the Persian Gulf will recover proportionately to geographic and cultural weights.
Sharg: From lifting sanctions to damage ceilings of compensation and concentration
In a recent article, Sharg explored Iran’s stance on returning to nuclear negotiations with the US amidst rising tensions and stagnant diplomacy. The talks that have advanced in Oman are now dormant, covered in military conflict and deep mistrust against Iran. While speculation is growing about the possibility of a new dialogue, Tehran has made it clear that it will not re-enter the negotiations without specific assumptions. These include a full lifting of sanctions, a defined cap for uranium enrichment, and compensation for damages caused by military strikes. These demands reflect a major shift in tone that shows Iran wants more than just a symbolic gesture. We want a verifiable assurance that nuclear rights are respected. The current discussion goes far beyond technical details such as the number of centrifuges. What is at stake is the credibility of diplomacy itself, carried out under the threat of looming forces. While Washington seeks a quick return to the speech, Tehran argues that one party needs to reach an agreement on an equal footing, rather than having a gun at the table. This conditional attitude shows that Iran remains open to negotiations, but only one based on mutual recognition, accountability and guarantees.
Siasat-e-Rooz: We should stand strong
In the editorial, Siasat-e-Rooz emphasizes the importance of projecting powerful and authoritative forces in the aftermath of a 12-day war involving Iran. It writes: Israel, the United States, and several European countries have participated in an unequal war with Iran. Ultimately, the United States called for a ceasefire. Within Iran regarding war there is a general sense of public pride. People viewed Iran’s performance as a victory despite extensive propaganda and psychological warfare by their enemies. This victory fostered the public’s confidence in Iran’s defence. However, debates over negotiations with the US lack political credibility as Trump continues to claim that he has destroyed Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. In this environment, the basis for future lectures is a concern. If such a claim was true, it suggests, but there would be nothing to negotiate. The lack of assertive language and action only burns the enemy to demand submission in exchange for concession. When we don’t speak strongly, Trump says, “If Iran listens like Syria, we’ll lift the sanctions!”