Tehran – In the analysis, Sharg examined the dual actions of the UN nuclear watchdog and its main Rafael Grossi on Iran’s nuclear program and attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
It writes: The contradiction in the position of Rafael Grossi, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has once again raised a serious question about the organization’s neutrality. His report laid the basis for a resolution against Iran and a resolution to Israel’s military attacks, but a few days later he highlighted the lack of evidence for Iran’s nuclear weapons programme. These contradictions have shifted the role of the institution as a technical supervisory body to political functioning. If Grossi did not want to support the parties, it was his legal and moral obligation to provide a clear response to attacks on nuclear facilities monitored by the agency, in line with international procedures. He said the attack was “dangerous”, but refused to condemn it. Whether the agency wants it or not, it is not only a supervisor, but also an institution where the director’s words can have a safe impact. If agency directors cannot distinguish between technical warnings and political approvals, how can we expect to protect vulnerable, non-enhancing regimes?
Sobh-e-no: Iran and the Strategic Deterrence Initiative
Recent developments in West Asia can not only be analysed as a military conflict between Iran and the Israeli regime, but also demonstrate the shift in Iran’s security doctrine from passive deterrence to aggressive and aggressive deterrence. Recently, Iran has shown that it has moved beyond its “strategic perseverance” strategy to attack the interests of its enemies, and is seriously pursuing a “strategic punishment” approach. Unlike in the past, Iran simply responded to Zionist aggression, and we see the emergence of wise attack strategies with coordinated security, military and psychological measures. This event is not the end of the story, but the beginning of a new phase of dynamic deterrence in the region, serving its potential as a model of other independent countries facing global hegemony. You can also create new developments of security architectures elsewhere, from Latin America to Southeast Asia.
Etemad: People are the biggest support
In an interview with reformist political activist Gholamhossein Karbaschi, Etemaad called people the biggest asset of founding during these difficult times. He said: There is an undeniable reality in Iran: the biggest and most important backbone of systems and governance structures are people. Essentially, when society unites, there is a national consensus, and people support the government and its decisions. In such circumstances, people are the highest deterrent against countries and groups with hostile regimes and malicious intentions. They are the main breakwaters against attacks. History also shows that enemies and malicious actors do not consider invasion, hostile behavior, or Iran’s issues, unless negative propaganda poses domestic challenges. The main support for this system is the national consensus that has existed since the beginning of the revolution. If national unity is weakened, the greed of the enemy attacking Iran’s interests will increase, and each time this unity and consensus is strengthened, the enemy will retreat further.
Arman-e-Melli: Behind a closed room
In his commentary, Ahman Emery discussed Foreign Minister Abbas Aragut’s trip to Russia, writing: Perhaps the main purpose behind the visit is to purchase Russian military equipment and even technology to counter the Israeli war with Iran. It also appears that Russia could provide intelligence to Iran (to counter the US-supported Israeli war against Iran). Before launching the attack on Iran, Putin had expressed his readiness to play a diplomatic role between Tehran and Washington in his discussion with Trump. We suggest that Tehran highlights Moscow’s important role in international trade, as well as the silence of the discussions that Aragut had.