Iran International
The three Iranian newspapers closest to the heart of power have adopted a maverick stance against talks with Washington, signaling that the theocracy's most powerful institutions remain deeply skeptical of diplomacy with their arch-nemesis.
While the Culture Ministry, the Supreme Council of National Security and the Press Supervisory Board issue ad hoc directives to newspaper editors about what to publish, three newspapers consistently defy those and often escape with a gentle caution.
They are Kayhan, Javan and Vatan-e Emrooz, linked respectively to the Supreme Leader’s office, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the ultraconservative Paydari Party, all of which continue to criticize the negotiations with the United States – in apparent disregard of the highest office of the realm.
Earlier this week, Kayhan, known for its staunch anti-Americanism, attacked those who back talks with Washington, accusing them of turning a blind eye on the harm done to Iran by US sanctions.
"Why should we trust Trump, a man even his allies do not trust," the paper asked, using some unusually provocative language to describe Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Ultraconservative daily Vatan-e Emrooz also cautioned in its editorial against advancing the talks in a way that would make withdrawal or retreat from any agreement impossible.
The negotiating team should be wary of leaving Iran vulnerable to exploitation, the editorial warned.
The admonitions and the critiques may not be as harsh as they were a couple of weeks ago – prior to Khamenei’s cryptic backing of negotiations. But the very fact that they keep flowing after the leader’s blessing of diplomacy is significant.
"Speaking without restraint at times ... our unnecessary objections, our lack of patience, and our flawed analyses of situations can have historical consequences,” Khamenei cautioned last week with no direct reference to the ongoing negotiations.
“Therefore, we must be very careful," he said. But the trio appear to have not received the memo. Or maybe they have.
The three dailies not only represent powerful factions within the Islamic Republic’s polity, but they also enjoy direct access–with varying degrees–to Khamenei’s office.
It may be easier, therefore, to explain their editorials as necessary objections, contingencies for a potential policy shift should the interests of the leadership require one.
No surprise, perhaps, that IRGC-linked Javan, the daily closest to and representing actual power, has shown the most balanced approach to the negotiations in recent weeks.
"Iran may wish to maintain its image as an anti-imperialist warrior. But who says an agreement limited to eliminating sanctions against reducing enrichment levels will tarnish that image,” Javan asked in an editorial this week.
"We have done this before. Why shouldn't we do it again...? No country in the world will characterize this as Iran relinquishing its ideals."
Unlike other outlets in Iran, which face severe consequences for minor errors, these three dailies roam carefree on the theocracy’s political plane. Whether or not their tone is part of a grand strategy by the topmost officialdom remains unknown.
"Some say that Trump is unpredictable,” Javan concluded its editorial. “Well, we are not that predictable either!"
