Etemad, in a commentary, highlighted the importance of the Chabahar–Zahedan railway. It wrote: From the perspective of political economy, logistical infrastructure is the most sustainable tool for reducing countries’ vulnerability to external pressures.

By replacing land and sea routes controllable by Iran, the Chabahar–Zahedan railway removes a significant portion of foreign trade from sanction circuits and strengthens mechanisms for barter, regional transit, and non-oil exports. Expanding Iran’s share in Central Asia transit, fostering supporting industries, developing free trade zones, and increasing foreign direct investment are among the other consequences of connecting Chabahar to the rail network. The Chabahar–Zahedan railway is not merely an infrastructure project but a lever for reshaping Iran’s geoeconomic balance. This project reinforces the strategic shift from an oil-based economy to a logistics-based economy and elevates Iran’s infrastructural ties with Asian economies from tactical cooperation to structural integration. It is hoped that this national mega-project, in addition to boosting oil exports and supporting economic growth, will create employment opportunities and attract investment across the Makran coasts.

Sobh-e-No: Iran is neither a threat nor ignorable

Sobh-e-No examined Washington’s view of Iran in the new U.S. National Security Strategy. It argued: Unlike the tradition of past decades, this document does not place Iran at the center of U.S. security threats, mentioning it only three times. This sharp reduction comes despite Iran having been a constant fixture in U.S. security strategies over the past two decades, often classified as a “major challenge, long-term threat, or key destabilizing force.” Despite the document’s attempt to downplay Iran’s role, the 2025 National Security Strategy conceals a fundamental contradiction. On the one hand, it claims the Middle East is no longer “the center of U.S. foreign policy” and that Iran has been severely weakened; on the other hand, it emphasizes the protection of vital U.S. interests in the region: energy security, freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, countering threats against allies, and maintaining the balance of power. These interests cannot be guaranteed without Iran’s involvement or direct containment. This contradiction reveals that the Trump administration’s strategy diverges from reality and cannot, in practice, rest on the assumption of a “low-risk Iran.” Analysts at the Atlantic Council also warn that reducing focus on Iran and the region could heighten Washington’s risks and open opportunities for China, Russia, and even regional actors.

Iran: Damascus needs Iran’s balancing role in the region

Hossein Ajorlou, a West Asia expert, in an interview with the Iran newspaper, says Damascus needs to rely on Iran’s balancing role in the region. Ajorlou acknowledged that Iran’s geopolitical importance and its capacity to create balance are highly significant. In the long run, it is Syria that needs Iran. Although the new Syrian government outwardly defines Iran and the Axis of Resistance as “other” in its foreign policy, without Iran’s strategic weight, Syria is turning into a purely subordinate actor and cannot withstand even a single day of repeated Israeli incursions, the de facto dominance of certain regional states in the north, or the U.S. presence in the east. Historical experience has shown that Iran is the only power capable of elevating Syria’s geopolitical standing in the Arab world without humiliating it, thereby creating genuine equilibrium. Ultimately, whenever Syria moves toward genuine national sovereignty, Iran’s role will automatically become more prominent. All actors currently active in Syria view the situation through a geopolitical lens, and Iran is the only power that can serve as a “balancer” or provide equilibrium for Damascus. Many of Syria’s current problems with Israel, Turkey, and certain regional states stem precisely from the absence of Iran’s weight.

Donya-e-Eqtesad: Iran’s active diplomacy on three fronts

Donya-e-Eqtesad examined the diplomatic moves of Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi against the backdrop of ongoing negotiations with the United States. In his latest remarks—interpreted by some as a form of flexibility aimed at unlocking the nuclear file—Iran’s foreign minister announced Tehran’s readiness to resume talks with Washington on nuclear issues. Continuing the neighborhood policy, he traveled to Baku and is scheduled to head to Moscow in the coming days—moves that reflect Iran’s active diplomacy on three fronts: negotiations, relations with neighbors, and ties with the East. Analyses and reports regard Araghchi’s trip to Baku as another step toward strengthening Iran’s regional transit relations with its neighbors. It appears that this visit, alongside the foreign minister’s recent diplomatic initiatives and emphasis on the importance of negotiations with Western counterparts, signals that Iran, while prepared for dialogue with foes, is equally ready to expand logistical corridors and build broad political coalitions.