In Tehran-Memo, Sobh-e-no discusses the symptoms of revolutionary rationality, writing:
Contrary to the efforts of those who create false dichotomy between battlefield and diplomacy, current governments rely on institutional macropolicies, have prioritized support for resistance. The outcome of this approach was a succession of victory in the Resistance Front and strengthening the Iranian region’s position. Convergence on issues such as domestic political forces, particularly foreign policy, helps to integrate the outcomes of the axis of resistance. Pezeschkian’s support for facility macropolicy demonstrates a deep understanding of the international situation and the need to maintain unity against foreign pressures. Innovative rationality is the future path of the country. The presence of leadership in determining the country’s path with Devisal is the greatest asset of the Islamic revolution. The road has challenges and obstacles, but these obstacles can be overcome and can create a bright future in the country by relying on innovative rationality.
Ettelaat: Is Israel’s military attack on Israel possible?
In the analysis, Etterat addressed Israeli military attack options against Iran. It writes: Can Netanyahu launch an attack on Tehran’s nuclear facilities alone? This option seems unrealistic. The US president has repeatedly said he wants a new deal with the US and Israel’s biggest regional enemy, Iran. Netanyahu has devoted much of his political career to his main ideology. It’s about facing Iran. On all accounts, Israel’s preferred option is military action. Israeli extremists both domestically and internationally have long advocated attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Now they feel more empowered as they suffer from the illusion that Iran has been weakened after recent military development in the region. Netanyahu will be disappointed when Trump goes on the path of diplomacy. There is no guarantee that diplomacy will work. Therefore, Netanyahu may be saved from the dilemma of standing up or surrendering to Trump.
Jam-e-Jam: Faced with Iran’s barriers, Trump has been undecided
In his commentary, Jam-e-Jam tackled America’s chaos over Iran. The paper has published news about Saudi Arabia’s attempts to mediate between Tehran and Washington at an age when Americans and Zionist officials in Tel Aviv spoke with the language of threats to Iran. This issue, more than anything, shows the repetition of America’s chaos and failed strategies in confronting Iran. The recurring policy of “sticks and carrots” that the United States has used over the past decades to change the behavior of the Iranian Republic. Therefore, America’s foreign policy against Iran is once again at a time of contradiction and confusion. Donald Trump, who previously called Iran “strong” and admitted that he couldn’t contain Tehran, has returned to his threat and sanctions policy. Washington knows that the inevitable outcome of a maximum pressure policy will fail, but he does not want to embrace the new reality. After years of resisting diplomatic games and hostile pressure, Iran is not threatened by threats.
Donya-e-eqtesad: Chabahar Port development is under the influence of Gaza problems
In an interview with Amin Rezai Nejad, an expert in the Indian subcontinent, Donya Ektesad dealt with Iran and India’s decision to overcome the difficult situation. He said: There must be some points to consider to better understand the future of Iran-India’s political and economic relations under the Trump administration. First, alternative plans for developing Chabahar Port as an Indian trade corridor were stopped due to issues in Gaza. The second problem is that Trump is trying to implement a plan to relocate two million Gazanians to pressure Arab countries and ensure the security of the Zionist regime. Trump also threatened member states of Shanghai cooperative organizations with tariff penalties. India is also a member of this organization. As a result, there is a great deal of tension in relations between India and the US. As a result, it can be concluded that the balance of negotiations between New Delhi and Washington through the Chabahar port is a function of the progress of Donald Trump’s Palestinian relocation plan. In order for Tehran to improve relations with the Indian side, it appears that he will have to pursue diplomatic moves far from Chabahar port. In other words, with a greater consensus between Jordan and Egypt on the issue of Gazan evacuation.