TEHRAN - Shargh, in a commentary, discussed possible consequences of invoking the JCPOA’s dispute resolution mechanism by Europeans.

It wrote: Activating the snapback mechanism could have far-reaching consequences for Iran, the region, and even Europe. This could pose further challenges for Iran’s economy. However, some analysts believe that the impact of these sanctions is more psychological than practical, as Iran is already facing the most severe secondary sanctions from the U.S. and its economy has adapted to this situation to some extent. From a regional point of view, activating the snapback mechanism could increase tensions to a dangerous level. Iran could use active diplomacy with non-permanent members of the Security Council and strengthen alliance with Russia and China to prevent the consensus needed to return to sanctions. Also, proposing an interim agreement with limited and reversible concessions could be a way to buy time and preserve diplomacy. However, the success of this strategy depends on Iran’s ability to manage the balance between maintaining principled positions and diplomatic flexibility. Otherwise, activating the snapback mechanism could lead to the end of Europe's role in the Iran nuclear issue and an escalation of the regional crisis.

Siasat-e-Rooz: Successful diplomacy is a path to solve problems

Siasat-e-Rooz dedicated its editorial to the successful visit of Ali Larijani, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, to Iraq and Lebanon last week. The paper said: This visit is important in two aspects.  On one hand, a Tehran-Baghdad security memorandum was signed in Iraq that the core of which is fight against terrorism and any other security threat. This is important because the United States and the Zionist regime are determined to challenge the security of the entire region by reviving terrorism and strengthening separatist groups. In recent days, hostile media outlets have struggled a lot to destroy the relations between the two countries by making false accusations and creating an atmosphere. Larijani's visit and the warm welcome he received in Lebanon highlight the quality of ties between the governments of the two countries, which has led to the failure of the plots to undermine the relations between the parties. Larijani's words about the (Lebanese) Resistance is quite politically mature that does not need a master highlighted Tehran's determination to support the Resistance. These processes can be a component of achieving sustainable security in the region, which is shaped in the form of dignified and resistance diplomacy.

Iran: Two goals of Pezeshkian's trip to Armenia

In an analysis, the Iran newspaper discussed the imminent visit of President Pezeshkian to Armenia and said: This trip, especially after the recent agreement between the Republic of Azerbaijan and Armenia, demonstrates Iran's commitment to active diplomacy and an effective presence in regional equations. It proves that diplomatic isolation is not an option for Iran. In addition, the importance of Iran's active diplomacy in the South Caucasus, the historical relations between Iran and Armenia, and the necessity of confronting foreign influence in the region have added great importance to the President's trip to Yerevan at the current juncture. Pezeshkian pursues two important goals in his visit: first, this trip aims to strengthen bilateral relations with Armenia and emphasize Iran's role as a reliable partner in the region. Second, this trip provides an opportunity to clarify the dimensions of the peace agreement between Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan and focuses on cooperation in the areas of energy, infrastructure, and even military in the South Caucasus region.

Arman-e Melli: Friendship between Iran’s two northern neighbors benefits entire region 

In recent years, developments in the South Caucasus have once again drawn regional and global attention. One of the key issues is the proposed creation of a 40-kilometer corridor known as the “Zangezur” between Azerbaijan and Armenia. This route could pave the way for direct connectivity between the two countries and unlock potential for economic growth and transit in the region.

Some in Iran view this plan as a threat to national interests, but a realistic perspective reveals a different nature. The fundamental point is that peace and friendship between Iran’s two northern neighbors is beneficial not only for them but also for the entire Caucasus region and Iran itself. Azerbaijan is an independent country and has the right to choose a route—whether for internal connectivity or international trade—that is economically and geographically more efficient. Conversely, Armenia can also benefit from transit rights and receive fees or dues in exchange for the use of its territory. Therefore, this route not only does not infringe upon the rights of any country, but it can also serve as an opportunity to reduce tensions and enhance cooperation. Some claim that establishing this corridor would disrupt Iran’s access to Europe. However, Iran currently does not use such a route. Iran’s connection to Europe can be pursued through various pathways, none of which are limited to passing through Armenia. Moreover, even if such a route is established in the future, the region’s geopolitical dynamics are such that no route can be guaranteed long-term stability. What truly matters is that Iran must always maintain access to multiple options for transit and trade.