In Tehran-in Commentary, Sobh-e-no worked on Trump’s aim to send letters to Iranian leaders for negotiations.
It writes: In addition to proposing negotiations, Trump has openly implemented military threats and harsher sanctions against Iran. He emphasizes reducing the impact of Iranian regions, highlighting more severe restrictions on missile programs and changing the country’s domestic policy. In fact, the negotiations he is seeking are merely “accepting all Washington’s demands.” In other words, he expects Iran to accept the terms set by the US in advance and then enter negotiations. Trump’s patterns of behavior in foreign policy are very clear. He first pressures countries with economic, commercial and even military threats, then offers negotiations. These negotiations are intended to impose Washington’s demands rather than finding a fair solution. Trump’s statement shows that his proposal for negotiations indicates that he puts pressure on the other side, not from a desire to resolve the issue.
Iran: Gathering by the sea
In the memo, Iranian newspapers discussed the “maritime security belt” drill between Iran, Russia and China. According to this paper, this year’s joint naval training in Iran, China and Russia should be seen as a response to the US military movement in the Red Sea and the Middle East. The US is trying to force Iran to choose between negotiating its nuclear capabilities or military operations, but has been busy doing military exercises in the region in recent weeks. The Zionist regime’s media evaluated these actions in the context of development and threats in the region, and of course as a direct message to Iran. Israel and the US have threatened military attacks in recent months as one option to tackle Iran’s nuclear capabilities. In this situation, this drill in the northern Indian Ocean should be viewed as a “meeting” of the three allies and their response to US military intervention in the region and an appropriate response to these threats.
Javan: “Bullying America” is a familiar term all over the world
In his analysis, Jawan discussed Iran’s position on the US and the affirmation of this position by several countries around the world. It wrote: In a statement, the White House once again reiterated Donald Trump’s position on Iran, saying there are only two ways to deal with Tehran. Apparently, it depends on Tehran to negotiate with the US to eliminate the risk of military conflict, but Western media has implicitly confirmed Iran’s position by highlighting the keyword “bullying.” In Tehran, debate continues to unfold, focusing on whether Tehran should choose a negotiation option and avoid conflict, or whether it should take a step towards conflict by rejecting Trump’s proposal for negotiations. The US public opinion and media atmosphere does not appear to have endorsed Trump’s diplomatic teams, from Ukraine to Western Europe, Canada and Mexico.
Arman-e-Melli: An Unclear Future
In an interview with former MP Heshmatollah Falahatpishheh, Arman-e-Melli analyzed the developments surrounding the possibility of Trump sending letters to leaders of the Islamic Revolution. He said: Trump tried to send a message to Iran in his own way, whether there was a letter or not. The response the leader gave was somehow a diplomatic rejection of Trump’s message. Two groups were waiting for the leader to make an unconventional response to Trump. One was a Zionist who was rushing to war with Iran, and welcomed domestic extremists and hardlines to refuse to negotiate, creating an increasing tension between Iran and Israel and a war situation. Therefore, we conclude from this exchange of open messages between the two aspects that (two) parties are trying to keep the door open for negotiation. Iranian side is waiting for Trump’s second message to arrive. Given the overall situation, there is still a possibility of using diplomacy. Of course, this time, it depends on whether Trump does not give another “open” message, allowing diplomats from both sides to declare their position.