TEHRAN - Writing an analysis in the Hamshahri newspaper, international affairs analyst Mehdi Khorsand believes China and Russia oppose the return of UN sanctions against Iran not because they fear losing the Iranian market but because they fear they may be the next target: Khorsand writes: Unfortunately, both before and after the JCPOA, Iran has failed to capitalize on the potential of international agreements with various countries and blocs.

Despite Iran’s strategic position in global transit, it has not taken adequate steps to assert its role. While Iran holds membership in organizations such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, these affiliations have yielded minimal tangible benefits. Iran has not succeeded in establishing meaningful economic integration with China and Russia, despite recognizing their global economic influence. The reality is that China and Russia’s opposition to the snapback mechanism is not driven by concern over losing access to Iran’s market. Rather, they fear that if Iran is targeted, they may be next. Their stance is rooted not in affection for Iran, but in opposition to the United States and the West.

Javan: Consequences of a “no war, no peace” scenario

Javan explored the ambiguous state of conflict between Iran and Israel, highlighting the psychological and strategic implications of this uncertainty. It wrote: The amplification of perceived threats against Iran has become a central tactic in the psychological and cognitive warfare waged by hostile entities and certain Western media outlets. By exaggerating the enemy’s capabilities and downplaying Iran’s military strength and deterrence, these actors aim to legitimize potential threats and achieve their objectives with minimal cost. A key strategy is the creation of urgency around a possible military threat. This narrative increases public anxiety, disrupts economic stability, and cultivates dissatisfaction within Iran. The “no war, no peace” period is highly sensitive. The sensitivity of the “no war, no peace” period is no less—if not greater—than that of wartime itself, because its continuation can overshadow the key achievement of war: national unity and cohesion.

Iran: Consolidating Iran’s position regionally and internationally

The Iran newspaper has examined the strategic imperatives for Iran to solidify its standing both regionally and internationally. The article said in recent years, Israel has reframed the Arab-Israeli conflict into a confrontation with Iran. Iran now finds itself at a critical crossroads, requiring internal reconstruction and a recalibration of its policies and strategic posture. The country’s current situation entails comprehensive reforms in both domestic and foreign policy. During the 12-day war in June, Iran’s military response succeeded in partially shifting the balance of power, ultimately compelling Israel to agree to a ceasefire. It should be noted that Iran has been caught in conflict not only with Israel but also with several (Western) countries. Therefore, it is necessary to seriously think about the steps ahead and the future of possible wars and their consequences for the country. Iran needs reforms in its national, regional, and international strategies to strengthen its position. Iran needs to strengthen its public support base. Therefore, to maintain its national, regional, and international position, the Islamic Republic of Iran must update its strategies and define its behavior towards regional countries and Arab actors with new conditions.

Donya-e-Eqtesad: China’s model for evading sanctions

In an article, Donya-e-Eqtesad explored how China evades sanctions to trade with Iran. It said reputable international media have confirmed China’s use of barter mechanisms and hidden financial channels to enable sustainable economic cooperation with Iran under sanctions. This trade relationship operates on a “oil-for-infrastructure” model, where goods are exchanged directly between the two countries. Chinese institutions play a key role in financing Iranian projects and indirectly transferring oil revenues. These mechanisms help maintain Iran’s oil exports, meet its infrastructure needs, strengthen China’s interests, and weaken the sanctions system. Moreover, this approach enhances China’s influence in the Middle East—a region long dominated by the United States. For Iran, beyond vital financial support, these agreements deliver essential infrastructure and reduce its geopolitical isolation.

Arman Melli: Netanyahu’s new plan against Iran

Writing an article in the Arman-e Melli newspaper, Seyed Jalal Sadatian, Iran’s former ambassador to London, said, Benjamin, given the extensive support he enjoys in the U.S., is seeking to implement a new plan against Iran. This support includes members of Congress, major capitalists, and American media groups who have aligned their positions in favor of his policies. The overall goal of this movement is to achieve influence and complete dominance in the Middle East, in such a way that they can both limit the power of China and Russia and also change the outlook and policies of European countries toward the region. From Netanyahu and his allies’ perspective, Iran is the only country that remains as an independent and influential power in the region, preventing Israel and the U.S. from reaching their objectives. The Americans believe that of the seven governments opposed to them in the region, six have been overthrown and only Iran remains. Therefore, they intend to bring the policy of pressure on Iran into an operational phase, using Netanyahu as the executive arm of this plan.

One of the pillars of this strategy is the peace plan that Donald Trump has in mind for Gaza. However, Netanyahu, by resisting and delaying its implementation, seeks to increase political and economic pressure on Iran. In fact, through this maneuver, he aims to prepare global public opinion and persuade the United States to accompany him in pressuring Iran. Netanyahu believes that only with direct U.S. support he can force Iran to retreat and scale back its missile program. Another part of this plan uses Iran’s nuclear capabilities as a excuse to create international concern. The movement led by Netanyahu seeks to portray Iran’s missile power as a serious threat to U.S. security, thereby paving the way for a preemptive strike. Such operations could include direct actions against Tehran’s missile facilities and ultimately raise the pressure on Iran to unprecedented levels. This strategy is essentially part of a policy aimed at consolidating Israel’s influence in the region and limiting Iran’s capacity to exert power in the Middle East. Given recent developments, it is clear that Iran must act with caution and vigilance to prevent potential crises and preserve its position in the face of international pressures.