TEHRAN - Shargh examined Kazakhstan’s accession to the Abraham Accords and explored its implications.

The paper argues that this development should be viewed as a serious warning for Iran’s foreign policy. While Tehran remains heavily focused on Middle East dossiers and traditional crises such as Gaza, Yemen, and the JCPOA, a new configuration of power is quietly emerging along Iran’s northern border. The policy of “active neighborhood engagement” now demands a genuine redefinition. Iran must move beyond slogans and statements and begin formulating a clear doctrine for Central Asia, a region that has become not only a theater of competition between Russia and China but also a gateway for overt involvement by the United States and Israel. If Iran remains passive in this arena, the formation of a new security belt stretching from the Caucasus to Central Asia—anchored by political-security ties among Israel, the U.S., and Turkey—may become a reality. Such a trajectory could significantly undermine Iran’s balancing strategy in the North and East and impose new security costs on Tehran. Kazakhstan’s accession to the Abraham Accords is therefore not merely a diplomatic headline; it signals the emergence of a new regional order—one that is unfolding without Iran, and potentially against it.

Resalat: A strategic move to strengthen border security

In a recent note, Resalat addressed the expansion of border markets between Iran and Pakistan, emphasizing that this initiative is not merely an economic project. Rather, it constitutes a strategic measure to enhance border security, curb smuggling, generate local employment, and promote regional stability. When borders become platforms for legal economic activity, barter trade, and commercial exchange, incentives for illicit operations and insecurity diminish significantly. At a broader level, the development of border markets can strengthen people-to-people ties between the two neighboring nations, foster cultural exchanges, and reduce border sensitivities. When communities on both sides of the frontier benefit from stable and legitimate trade, social cohesion is reinforced, paving the way for deeper security cooperation. Moreover, economic proximity to Pakistan offers Iran an opportunity to activate its regional capacities and diversify its economy in the face of Western sanctions. If this initiative is pursued with careful planning and sustained economic diplomacy, it could open a new path for consolidating Tehran-Islamabad ties across economic, security, and cultural dimensions; a path that ultimately serves sustainable development and regional stability.

Javan: Iran’s geopolitical role cannot be excluded from regional equations

Javan interviewed Mehdi Khorsand, an expert on international and Eurasian affairs, regarding Iran’s strategic significance. He emphasized that the growing importance of transit corridors—and their pivotal role in fostering economic cohesion and trade prosperity—has prompted countries worldwide to invest heavily in their development. Iran, owing to its unique geopolitical position both regionally and globally, remains a focal point of attention. Conversely, efforts to evade and exclude Iran from transit routes have become a strategic tool for its foes. The foes intend to isolate Iran internationally and put multifaceted pressure on Iran. As a result, the “corridor battle” has emerged as a new front in geopolitical confrontation. If Iran’s latent advantages are actualized, neighboring countries could transport goods more efficiently, with lower costs and shorter timelines. This would enable Iran to evade sanctions, as the economies of surrounding nations become increasingly dependent on its geopolitical infrastructure. Such dependency is a major asset: once Iran’s transit routes are fully operational and regional economies flow through its territory, any new sanctions would likely provoke reactions from neighboring states.

Khorasan: Sudan and the opportunity for Iran’s soft power

Khorasan analyzed Sudan’s strategic relevance to Iran, identifying two key dimensions. First is the geography of the Red Sea. Second is Sudan’s role in regional politics. The country sits at the intersection of competing interests among Egypt, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and others, centered on ports, desert borders, and the arms market. Any ill-considered move could inadvertently entangle Tehran in complex, irreversible rivalries. In such a volatile environment, Iran’s optimal strategy is to expand its influence through low-cost channels, guided by pragmatic logic. By supporting temporary ceasefires, establishing humanitarian and relief corridors, and assuming a facilitative role, Tehran can engage effectively and gain legitimacy in Sudan’s evolving landscape. This approach also enhances the feasibility of pursuing Iran’s political and economic interests in the country. Amid famine and institutional collapse, what will embed Iran’s legitimate presence in Sudan’s collective memory is its role as a problem-solver; a role that not only boosts Iran’s diplomatic capital but also avoids friction with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE during this high-risk period.