Tehran – In the analysis, Horasan commented on the recent terrorist attacks on the Zahedan court (the capital of southeastern Sisitan Balusstan), saying: The attack was more than just a security incident. Rather, it is a sign that the enemy has entered a new phase of war.
The incident is part of a large project designed in Western and Zionist think tanks in recent months and is currently in the implementation phase. The project is centered around three pillars. Creating public fear and panic. Create a platform for separatist groups to mobilize. Instills images of suspected internal security vulnerabilities. Western media has always been pushing for support for Iranian people and headlines defending human rights, but they are now adopting meaningful silence in the face of attacks on the Zahedan court. This silence not only presents a double standard, but also reveals that the concept of human rights is not a human value but a political tool for them. If the West is truly defending humanity, it must condemn the attack and identify its perpetrator as a terrorist. Otherwise, their slogans about anti-terrorism are merely publicity.
Ettelaat: European troika threatens Iran again
In the memo, Etterat dealt with the new threat of European troika in calling a snapback mechanism that would return UN sanctions against Iran, which was lifted under the 2015 nuclear deal called the JCPOA. It writes: The leaders of three European countries, Britain, France and Germany, threatened to activate the snapback mechanism again in Iran. Their threat to Iran comes when Iran and Europe resume negotiations on Friday. The European Troika call to “Iran returns to diplomacy” was halted while two months of indirect negotiations between Iran and the United States were taking place along with Omani mediation, when two months of indirect negotiations were halted as the Zionist regime launched an offensive act against Iran and then later, and the US committed an invasion by blowing up Iran’s nuclear power plants. Iran has announced that finding a diplomatic solution to the nuclear issue is robust, but it argues that negotiations need to ensure that aggressive attacks against Iran are not repeated. European countries threaten to invoke a snapback mechanism, thereby reinstating all UN sanctions against Iran. While many analysts believe that the legal basis for this action is unjustified, there are also some technological and diplomatic moves that could change the future of Iran-European relations.
Kayhan: Missile capabilities advantage
Kayhan dedicated his editor to Iranian missile forces in the June war with Israel. It writes: In a 12-day war, Iran proved its ability to hit the enemy. Previously, the enemy had concluded that Iran could hit Iran without being able to respond effectively. Israeli sources recently revealed that two weeks before the start of the war, Netanyahu told Donald Trump during a visit to the US that “Iran will attack so hard that it cannot fire missiles in Israel for decades in 24 hours.” Following the 12-day conflict, Israel and the United States have been called for a ceasefire despite being initiators. It has become clear to them that they are unable to establish an effective deterrence against Iran. They now recognize Iran’s ability to withstand attacks and deliver powerful retaliatory blows, even under simultaneous pressure from both countries, despite the sophisticated weapons owned by the occupying regime.
Iran: The Ominous Goals of Europe
In an interview with International Relations Professor Seyyed Jalal Dehghani Firouzabadi, the Iranian newspaper sought the main European goal of proposing to extend the snapback mechanism. He said: The key goal in proposing to expand the snapback is to obtain more accurate information about the status of Iran’s nuclear facilities and the levels of its highly enriched uranium reserves. Even if negotiations between Iran and the US become possible, Europe will remain independent and will try to pursue demands using snapback leverage. As a result, we must recognize that the expansion of the snapback mechanism was intended to buy time and maintain the means of pressure on Iran, rather than to resolve the crisis. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran must clarify its position on the issue of snapback in the short time remaining until the expiration of resolution 2231. This seems unlikely to retreat from the decision to activate it over the next six months. Otherwise, this European position would simply pave the way for denounce Iran, and could also serve as an excuse to justify Trump’s return to his maximal pressure campaign or justify a new Israeli attack.