Hamshahri analyzed Iraqi Prime Minister Al Sudani's visit to Tehran and wrote: Considering that prevention of resistance groups' attacks on the American military sites (in Iraq and Syria) was the main focus of Blinken's negotiations in Iraq, some believe that the Iraqi Prime Minister probably carried a message from the Americans to Iran.

Speculation about the message of the Americans can be interpreted whining the context of Iran’s foreign minister’ remarks, who in his latest position on the current developments in the occupied territories, stated that the wearing of the bulletproof vest by the U.S. Secretary of State in Baghdad shows "the reality of the role of the United States". He also declared that in the past three days, a message has been received from the Americans that they are looking for a "ceasefire". Amir Abdollahian stated though they make such claims, in practice they only support the “genocide” in Gaza. The minister hoped that America would change its policy in supporting the occupying side as soon as possible. Nevertheless, it is not yet clear whether the "ceasefire message" that Amir Abdollahian mentioned was transferred to Iran during Al Sudani's Monday visit to Tehran or not.

Kayhan: The growing pressure of Iran's allies on America

Kayhan wrote in a note: When U.S. President Joe Biden sent aircraft carriers to the Middle East after Hamas attacked Israel, he said one word to Iran and its allies: "Don't". Since then, there have been rocket, drone, and missile attacks on Israel and American forces by the network of Iranian-allied militias throughout the region, but so far it has not turned into a regional conflict. During the bloody fighting in Gaza between Israel and Hamas, a broader and potentially more dangerous rivalry with Iran is growing. After abandoning the approach of maximum pressure on Iran, the Biden administration quietly sought to reduce tensions in recent months. But today, Iran not only celebrated the attacks of Hamas but also threatened the interests of the United States through its proxies. Iran is currently trying to maximize diplomatic engagement, and Iran's Foreign Minister has been as active in regional consultations as Blinken.

Iran: Iran's return to the golden Silk Road

In a commentary, the Iran newspaper analyzed the signing of China’s corridor protocol with Europe through Iran. It wrote: Iran, because of its special geographical position and due to its location in the middle of the Silk Road, has always been the focus of Western and Eastern countries as a transit route. This road has been important for Iran more than other countries in commercial and cultural fields, so it is important to revive this road and return to its golden age and be on its path. The signing of the strategic cooperation document between Tehran and Beijing is an important step to formalize long-term cooperation between the two sides; this step shows that Iran has defined itself as an important part of the "One Belt One Road" plan. The extensive economic benefits of reviving the Silk Road for the countries on the path can motivate countries to help establish regional security and diplomatic efforts.

Sisat-e-Rooz: Improving deterrence and offensive power

In an article, Siasat-e-Rooz discussed the level of Iran's deterrence and said: These days, when the radical Israeli minister spoke about dropping atomic bombs on Gaza, some analyses are being repeated about the need for Iran's nuclear deterrence. According to the defenders of acquiring nuclear weapons, Iran's nuclear program became an excuse to issue various resolutions against the country from the beginning of the 2000s. The government chose the best option to respond to these sanctions resolutions: "Unveiling a military achievement after issuance of a resolution". This move was a measure to stop the issuance of resolutions against the country, which is considered an achievement and has brought awareness to the decision-making process in the West. As a result, it is considered that, in response to the movements of the enemy, whether in diplomacy and soft war or during military conflicts, either one should be active or it is necessary to respond to his actions with an important and effective action such as making weapons or something like that. Otherwise, the enemy doubts the will of the system's decision-makers.