TEHRAN - Etemad analyzed the vague and semi-suspended trade exchanges between Iran and neighboring Pakistan.

It wrote: Trade between Iran and Pakistan has been stuck for years in a half-closed, ineffective state. The problem is not a lack of will or opportunity; the problem lies in the absence of structure, security, infrastructure, and regulatory stability. Without these four pillars, no matter how much we talk about advantages, nothing will happen. In practice, Iran–Pakistan trade remains largely ad hoc, driven by individual initiatives and marked by instability. To unlock this deadlock, the current situation must change. The first step is securing borders and trade routes; without that, no economic diplomacy will succeed. The second step is regulatory stability; trade cannot function in an environment where directives change weekly. The third step is establishing a genuine banking channel, and the fourth is reforming logistical infrastructure. Expanding Iran–Pakistan trade will not come from rhetoric; it requires structure and execution. If these four axes are properly aligned, bilateral trade could rise from two billion to eight–ten billion dollars within three years. The condition is that this time the framework must be “measurable and executable.”

Ham Mihan: Looking East and leaning on wealthy neighbors is not an absolute solution

In a commentary, Ham Mihan examined Iran’s foreign policy orientation toward the East by seeking the views retired diplomat Sabah Zangeneh, who said: Neither a “Look East” policy under current conditions can be considered absolutely beneficial and salvific, nor reliance on our wealthy neighbors and what they might do. Our neighbors have their own problems. Currently, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are indirectly fighting each other in Sudan. For this reason, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has asked Trump to intervene in Sudan and control the situation. Russia, too, has its own issues. If an incident occurs or pressure is placed on Iran, it is unclear to what extent Russia’s support can be relied upon. The main focus of attention must be on our society, and the capacities that the people can generate. A solution must be found; once that happens, the United States will approach us on its own, and Eastern countries such as Russia and China will know with whom they can work. They will then engage with a capable leadership prepared to bring transformation and resolve the fundamental problems of society.

Iran: The need for interactive engagement with IAEA

The Iran newspaper, in an interview with Ebrahim Motaghi, a Tehran University professor, examined the White House’s strategy toward Iran. Motaghi stated: Trump’s strategy was based on “peace-building through power.” He believed Iran had advanced its nuclear capabilities and therefore needed to face restrictions. These restrictions emerged during a period shaped by economic sanctions. In the second stage, the United States used mechanisms of international institutions to limit Iran’s power, and in the third stage, it relied on military tools to minimize Iran’s nuclear capacity. The important point is that diplomacy has not yet ended. The November 21 resolution against Iran at the IAEA Board of Governors (that was crafted by the European trio of Britain, France, Germany along with the U.S.) shows that despite threats, diplomatic channels remain open. Under such circumstances, Iran needs to adopt a policy of interactive engagement with the IAEA so that its case is closed at the Board of Governors and not referred to the UN Security Council. Diplomatic necessities require that Iran place on its strategic agenda the groundwork for controlling and containing U.S. sanctions and pressures.

Kayhan: The end of SWIFT is near

Kayhan argued that SWIFT is possibly coming to the end of its life. It wrote: America’s escalating sanctions against Iran and its allies, while China and Russia are rapidly expanding alternative financial networks to SWIFT at an unprecedented pace, pose a serious question for Iranian policymakers: Will Tehran continue to wait for an agreement with Washington, or will it actively join these new mechanisms and become part of a financial order beyond the dollar? At a time when sanctions against Iran and Russia grow harsher by the day, and China is engaged in a tariff war with the U.S., regional organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS have become stronger than before. Meanwhile, America’s use of sanctions tools is expanding daily. This situation has created sensitive conditions, as it encourages sanctioned states to form a kind of “club” and separate their trade relations from the official global system operating under U.S. hegemony. Today, the U.S. employs instruments such as SWIFT and institutions like FATF to control and exploit global trade. This has led other countries to consider finding replacements for them.