TEHRAN - Jam-e-Jam, examined the anti-terror military exercises -- codenamed “Sahand 2025” -- that Iran is holding jointly with five countries from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Shabestar, East Azarbaijan Province, arguing the drills will enhance Tehran’s military deterrence and help foster military cooperation between the SCO states.

It said the drill represents a golden opportunity for Iran to enhance its military capabilities within the SCO framework. By focusing on joint counterterrorism operations, the drill allows Iran to share its experience in confronting cross-border threats with other member states. Cooperation with military powers such as China and Russia—core members of the SCO—facilitates the exchange of advanced technologies. Iran can benefit from Russian air defense systems or Chinese information technologies, strengthening its deterrence against external threats. Such collaboration not only guarantees Iran’s security but also contributes to regional stability across Eurasia and reinforces initiatives in the fight against terrorism.

Kayhan: A distorted narrative of the 12-day war

Kayhan, in a commentary, criticized the distortion of the truth about the 12-day war by the West, Israel, and their supporters inside Iran. The paper wrote that the 12-day war was the moment when the United States and Israel imagined they could inflict a military blow on Iran by destabilizing the country. Yet the reality on the battlefield shattered that dream with a heavy defeat. This truth is repeated in Hebrew and Western outlets. However, when the ceasefire was declared, the machinery of distortion was activated. What is striking, Kayhan commented, is that at this very historical juncture, pro-Western currents inside Iran attempt to downplay the enemy’s defeat. The truth of the 12-day war is now clear and recorded, and what remains is the necessity of confronting distortion. If the military arena marked the defeat of the U.S. and Israel, the media must not become a space where the defeated can conceal their loss with inverted headlines. The post-war period, Kayhan concluded, is a time to consolidate achievements; achievements that will be preserved not through compromise, but through clear narration and steadfast defense of national authority.

Iran: Tehran–Beirut ties still based on interests, strategic principles

The Iran newspaper, in an interview with regional affairs expert Seyyed Reza Sadr al-Hosseini, analyzed the latest developments in Tehran–Beirut relations. The analyst noted that after the October 7 operation, the Lebanese government did not show a positive reaction; an approach that raised expectations that Lebanese officials, unlike in the past, would tread more cautiously in strengthening ties with the Islamic Republic. Beyond the political differences between Tehran and Beirut, there is a deliberate effort by regional and international media linked to the U.S. and Israel to portray natural disagreements between the two governments as deep rifts and political crises. Importantly, the level of diplomatic relations between the two countries has remained unchanged compared to the pre-October 7 operation. This reality contradicts the narrative of media outlets that exaggerate differences to suggest structural coldness in Iran–Lebanon relations. Given the deep historical and social roots of the bond between the two nations, and their shared needs—such as the importance of independence, resistance against occupation, and opposition to land seizure—Tehran–Beirut relations continue to be pursued and strengthened based on national interests and strategic principles.

Arman-e-Emrooz: A region on brink of explosion

Arman-e-Emrooz, in an article on the region’s critical situation and potential war between Iran and Israel, wrote that according to most observers, a second war between Iran and Israel is inevitable. They argue it is only a matter of time. In recent days, due to the ongoing deadlock in Iran’s relations with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the lack of political breakthroughs in Iran–U.S. relations, and certain media-driven narratives, the likelihood of war has once again increased. The ignition of the current frozen conditions may require smaller triggers, such as the resumption of uranium enrichment in Iran or developments regarding the uncertain status of enriched uranium stockpiles. The most likely development that could draw Iran back into conflict is an imminent war on Lebanon. The deadline set by the U.S. and Israel for the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah is nearing its end, and Israeli movements indicate readiness to return to war. The intensity and consequences of such an attack could provoke an Iranian response and expand the fronts of conflict. Tel Aviv, by adopting a new doctrine, is determined at all costs to prevent a return to the pre–October 7 era—the so-called “age of equations.” This doctrine is designed to block the revival of the Axis of Resistance under the leadership of Iran. Clearly, under this strategy, both the weakening of Iran’s military capabilities and the continuation of economic isolation remain central objectives. This is precisely the deadlock in which even a small spark could ignite a raging fire.