The column ‘Persian Press Review’ features the headlines and leading articles carried by Farsi dailies.

Saturday’s headlines: ASRAR: Ayatollah Emami-Kashani criticizes some slogans chanted (against some religious and political figures) on December 30 and says all marchers should be respected during Bahman 22 (February 11) rallies (a day marking the victory anniversary of the Islamic Revolution)
ETELAAT: Deadly explosions in city of Karbala
IRAN: Tupolov planes are to be phased out (following the consecutive plane crashes)
BAHAR: Rift within the Combatant Clergy Association (a major principlist group)
KAYHAN: Crimes by Saudi and U.S. agents: terrorists massacre mourners of Imam Hussein (AS) in Karachi and Karbala
TOSE’A: MPs submit the second complaint against Mir-Hossein Mousavi, announces national prosecutor general
TEHRAN-E EMROOZ: Disruption in sending short messages (following disruption) in the Internet service; the current year (March 2009-March 2010), the worst for the communication services
ETEMAD: Seyyed Hasan Khomeini (Imam Khomeini’s grandson) sends protesting letter to the national broadcaster (IRIB) threatening to reveal the truth
Leading articles: Hossein Shariat-Madari, the managing director of ‘KAYHAN’ has mildly criticized Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his recent remarks regarding Iran’s new stance on the nuclear deal. Unfortunately the president’s remarks (on last Tuesday) about the nuclear fuel swap can be misinterpreted as a retreat by Iran. That is why that the West welcomed these remarks, although they looked at statements dubiously. Ahmadinejad has said, “What is wrong with giving our (nuclear) fuel? If they take our fuel and don’t give (20-percent enriched nuclear) fuel back, whose words are proven? Then it turns out that the IAEA’s claims are invalid.” The writer asks the president that whether he is doubtful that IAEA has not been bound to legal and technical principles during the past seven years. Is it wise to give them the country’s enriched uranium to prove their untruthfulness? The president has said if the IAEA goes back on its word, then “we ourselves will do our works.” The writer asks another question: Haven’t we done our works so far? The president has said, “I have been assured that these countries (5+1 group) aim to change (their approach) from confrontation to interaction.” The writer says what is the president’s evidence for such a comment; the current evidence not only does not confirm such hypothesis but rather is in direct contrast to what the president has said. The prominent journalist has also criticized the president for not mentioning the United States when he named Britain and Israel as the countries who are displeased with Iran’s interaction (with group 5+1). It was essential that the president mention the United States as the main enemy to refute the baseless rumors that one of his close colleagues is willing to interact with the United States. As the final word, the writer has warned the president of the infiltration of certain elements who have anti-revolutionary viewpoints.
‘TEHRAN-E EMROOZ’ in its editorial has commented about the president’s recent remarks about the nuclear deal. The president has said that he had been assured that the 5+1 group members aim to change their approach from confrontation to interaction. These remarks have been regarded as a major change of stance. Possibly, the president as the Supreme National Security Council chairman is informed about some news, but due to any reason he has not seen it expedient to reveal such news to the public. And probably these remarks are in keeping with the policies adopted according to that information. But for the media outlets that are not informed about the behind the scenes, nothing has changed and no evidence is seen confirming the West’s willingness for interaction.
‘DONYA-E EQTESAD’ in its editorial has called on officials to carefully eye China’s actions. China has once more opposed the U.S. move to impose further sanctions against Iran. The United States needs China’s cooperation for passing a new resolution against Iran at the Security Council. China can veto any resolution drafted by the United States envisaging further sanctions against Tehran. But China and Russia have not vetoed any resolution against Iran. China’s varying stances on Iran’s nuclear issue are not reliable. China in its competition with the West wants to display its independence, so it takes a different stance towards Iran. Officials should keep a close eye on China’s relation with the West to detect quickly any shift in Beijing’s policy. But currently Iran can take advantage of China’s stance to counter the U.S. pressure.