In the commentary, Tehran -Shargh discussed possible outcomes that could evoke the JCPOA conflict resolution mechanism by Europeans.
It writes: Activating the mechanism of snapback can have widespread consequences in Iran, the region, and even Europe. This could pose further challenges to Iran’s economy. However, some analysts believe that the effects of these sanctions are more psychological than practical, as Iran is already facing the most severe secondary sanctions from the US and its economy has adapted to this situation to some extent. From a local perspective, activating snapback mechanisms can increase tension to dangerous levels. Iran has been able to use active diplomacy with non-persistent members of the Security Council to strengthen its alliance with Russia and China, preventing the consensus needed to return to sanctions. Also, proposing a provisional agreement with limited, reversible concessions could be a way to buy time and maintain diplomacy. However, the success of this strategy depends on Iran’s ability to manage the balance between maintaining principles and maintaining diplomatic flexibility. Otherwise, activating snapback mechanisms could end Europe’s role in Iran’s nuclear issue, leading to escalation of regional crisis.
Siasat-e-Rooz: Success in diplomacy is the path to solving problems
Siasat-e-Rooz dedicated his compilation to the successful visit of Ali Larijani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council last week. The paper states: This visit is important in two aspects. On the one hand, Tehran-Baghdad’s security memorandum was signed in Iraq, with the heart of which being the fight against terrorism and other security threats. This is important. Because the US and Zionist regimes are determined to challenge the security of the entire region by reviving terrorism and strengthening separatist groups. Recently, hostile media has struggled to destroy relations between the two countries by making false accusations and creating atmosphere. The visit of Larijani and the warm welcome he received in Lebanon underscores the quality of relations between the governments of both countries, which leads to the failure of the plot that undermines relations between political parties. (Lebanese) Larijani’s words about resistance are very politically mature, without the need for a master who emphasizes Tehran’s determination to support resistance. These processes are elements of achieving sustainable security in the region and are shaped in the form of dignified, resisting diplomacy.
Iran: Two goals for Pezeshkian’s travel to Armenia
In the analysis, the Iranian newspaper discusses President Pezeshkian’s impending visit to Armenia, and the trip demonstrates Iran’s commitment to active diplomacy and its effective presence in the regional equation, particularly after the recent agreement between the Republic of Azerbaijan and Armenia. Diplomatic isolation proves that it is not an option for Iran. Furthermore, the importance of Iran’s active diplomacy in the South Caucasus, the historical relations between Iran and Armenia, and the need to confront foreign influence in the region, making presidential trips to Yerevan at this time of year extremely important. Pezeshkian pursues two important goals in his visit. First, the trip aims to strengthen bilateral relations with Armenia and highlight Iran’s role as a trusted partner in the region. Second, the trip provides an opportunity to clarify the dimensions of the peace agreement between Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan, focusing on cooperation in the energy, infrastructure and even military regions of the South Caucasus region.
Arman-e Melli: Friendship between two Northern Neighbors in Iran benefits the whole region
In recent years, the development of the South Caucasus has once again attracted regional and global attention. One important issue is the proposed creation of a 40-kilometer passageway known as “Zangezur” between Azerbaijan and Armenia. This route paves the way for direct connectivity between the two countries and unlocks the region’s economic growth and transport potential.
While some in Iran view the plan as a threat to national interests, the realistic perspective reveals a different nature. The fundamental point is that the peace and friendship of two Iranian north neighbours is beneficial not only for them, but also for the entire Caucasus region and Iran itself. Azerbaijan is an independent country and has the right to choose routes that are economically and geographically efficient. Conversely, Armenia also benefits from the right of passage and can receive fees or membership fees in exchange for use of its territory. Therefore, this route not only does not violate the rights of any country, but also serves as an opportunity to reduce tensions and strengthen cooperation. Some argue that establishing this corridor will disrupt Iran’s access to Europe. However, Iran is currently not using such a route. Iran’s connection to Europe can be pursued through a variety of routes, but none of them are confined to passing through Armenia. Furthermore, even if such a route is established in the future, the geopolitical dynamics of the region are so large that there are no routes that can guarantee long-term stability. What really matters is that Iran must always maintain access to multiple options for transportation and trade.