SAEDNEWS: A new wave of analysis in Iranian media has condemned Israel’s June offensive against the Islamic Republic as a strategic failure, with senior officials and commentators arguing that Tel Aviv failed to achieve its military, political, and regional objectives, while Tehran emerged emboldened both domestically and diplomatically.
In a detailed analytical piece, Jam-e-Jam newspaper examined the core objectives Israel pursued in launching its June war against Iran, concluding that none of them were realized.
According to the article, Israel entered the confrontation with three primary goals: to prevent Iran from acquiring what it claims are nuclear weapons, to weaken or dismantle the “axis of resistance” and the network of pro-Iranian forces across the region, and to cripple Iran’s ballistic missile program. These aims, Jam-e-Jam noted, are openly embedded in Israel’s contemporary security doctrine and served as the principal motivation for its decision to initiate direct military action.
On the domestic front, Israeli leadership also hoped the war would shift internal political dynamics, rally public opinion around the ruling government, and improve the standing of the regime’s political elites. Regionally, Tel Aviv anticipated that by undermining its primary strategic rival, it could alter the balance of power in the Middle East in its favor and foster a de facto coalition with Arab governments against Tehran.
However, the article concludes that these objectives went unfulfilled. Iran remained resilient, and the global reaction leaned toward condemnation of Israel’s aggression.
In an interview with Ettelaat newspaper, senior geopolitical analyst Abdolreza Faraji Rad addressed the potential activation of the UN snapback mechanism and its implications.
He argued that while the mechanism is a strategic pressure tool for Europe and the United States, it could have serious unintended consequences. “With snapback, Iran would be removed from the International Atomic Energy Agency’s oversight,” he warned. “This increases the risk of conflict in the region. If Iran exits the NPT, Europe’s interests are also threatened.”
Faraji Rad stressed the importance of immediate diplomatic engagement. “Iran needs to initiate dialogue with Europe now,” he said. “Our policies must be clarified. Tehran must also coordinate closely with China and Russia to ensure active support in the Security Council. These nations cannot afford to remain passive.”
He advised that Tehran should consider direct negotiations with both Europe and the United States, noting that the transatlantic allies are increasingly aligned on Iran, and time is not on Tehran’s side.
In an interview with Etemad, former Member of Parliament Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh discussed Iran’s ability to secure guarantees from the United States in the post-war landscape.
“In international relations,” he stated, “only power brings guarantees. Had Iran not emerged as the victorious force in the recent war with Israel, no one would be discussing negotiations today.”
Falahatpisheh argued that Iran’s decisive military performance in the 12-day conflict (June 13–24) changed the calculus. “Iran delivered the final blows and unveiled devastating weapons as the war concluded,” he said. “The lesson is clear: power ensures leverage.”
He called on the Iranian government to incorporate the war’s lessons into statecraft. “We must now strengthen morale—through technological, military, and strategic advancements. The message to the U.S. and Israel is unequivocal: if provoked again, Iran will respond with its most powerful tools.”
In an article published by Iran newspaper, the strategic significance of Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s recent trip to China was examined within the context of post-war diplomacy.
The report framed the visit as a continuation of Tehran’s efforts to reinforce the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and to reshape it into a bulwark against Western sanctions and extraterritorial pressures.
According to the paper, Iran is leveraging multilateralism and regional partnerships like the SCO to rally legal and political support from independent global actors against the West’s coercive strategies. Following the 12-day war, both Beijing and Moscow have emerged not only as economic allies but as pivotal geopolitical and diplomatic supporters of Iran’s legitimacy on the world stage.
The article concluded that Araghchi’s mission was part of a broader effort to synchronize foreign policy with anti-monopolistic global forces, extending Iran’s multilateral diplomatic reach from Central Asia to the corridors of the United Nations Security Council.
