<\/p>\n
For more stories from The Media Line go to themedialine.org<\/a><\/p>\n Asharq Al-Awsat, UK, June 20<\/p>\n History has a habit of repeating itself. Eleven years ago, Iran\u2019s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, stood smiling from a balcony in Vienna after signing the landmark nuclear agreement with Barack Obama\u2019s administration. Europe applauded, Russia and China endorsed it, and Tehran celebrated what it viewed as a major strategic victory. Yet the celebration proved short-lived. US President Donald Trump<\/a> tore up the agreement, sanctions returned, ports were blocked, oil tankers were pursued, and Iran found itself under intense pressure.<\/p>\n Today\u2019s preliminary \u201cVance-Ghalibaf\u201d agreement evokes memories of that earlier moment. Trump staged its signing at Versailles, hoping to frame it as a historic achievement, though Versailles itself is also remembered as the flawed peace that paved the way for a larger war. In the confusion surrounding the new framework, the most important question is not whether Iran regains frozen assets, receives economic assistance, or benefits from the reopening of Hormuz, but whether the agreement can survive.<\/p>\n The geopolitical consequences are potentially enormous. By lifting sanctions and restoring Iran\u2019s economic position, Washington risks rehabilitating Tehran as a major regional power after years of efforts to weaken it. The theory embraced by Vice President JD Vance \u2013 that economic integration will moderate Iran\u2019s behavior \u2013 sounds remarkably similar to Obama\u2019s belief that the 2015 agreement would strengthen moderates inside the regime.<\/p>\n Experience suggests otherwise. The last agreement coincided with greater repression at home and expanded Iranian influence across Iraq<\/a>, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. Most of the money Iran receives this time is likely to be directed first toward rebuilding military capabilities rather than improving living standards. Tehran\u2019s leadership remains convinced that military power is the foundation of national survival and regional influence.<\/p>\n Israel, meanwhile, is watching with anger and alarm. Having spent years working to weaken Iran, it is unlikely to accept Tehran\u2019s return as a strengthened regional power. Netanyahu will pressure Trump to tighten the terms of any final agreement, and skepticism will emerge not only from Israel and parts of the Gulf but also from hawks inside Trump\u2019s own administration.<\/p>\n The positive aspect of the framework is that it offers both sides an exit from a costly confrontation and creates space for further negotiations. Yet many of the most difficult issues remain unresolved. If sanctions are lifted and Iran regains access to oil revenues and reconstruction funds, the country could eventually receive hundreds of billions of dollars. That prospect raises a troubling possibility: that the agreement may create a stronger and more confident Iran than the one it was meant to restrain.<\/p>\n If subsequent negotiations fail to alter Tehran\u2019s behavior, Netanyahu may once again find himself leading the effort to confront Iran militarily.<\/p>\n \u2013 Abdulrahman Al-Rashed<\/p>\n Lebanon remains an Iranian card<\/p>\n Nida Al Watan, Lebanon, June 20<\/p>\n The memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran promises an immediate and permanent halt to military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon<\/a>, while affirming Lebanese sovereignty and territorial integrity. Yet the dispute that derailed the planned Swiss meeting appears rooted in the dissatisfaction of one ally that believes it has been excluded from the spoils despite being fully involved in the war that produced the agreement.<\/p>\n Israel, unhappy with the arrangement but largely silent in public, appears determined to continue military operations in pursuit of its own objectives. Iran, meanwhile, has no intention of allowing Lebanon\u2019s trajectory to become detached from that of the Islamic Republic. Tehran opened the southern Lebanese front to pressure Washington and distract Israel, and it will not tolerate developments that weaken its grip over what it still considers a strategic asset.<\/p>\n Lebanon\u2019s fate has repeatedly been negotiated by larger powers, whether through Syria after the Taif Agreement or through other regional arrangements. Today, Ira n seeks once again to retain control of the Lebanese file regardless of the cost to Lebanon itself.<\/p>\n The regime presents its survival after the war with the US and Israel as a victory and claims credit for forcing concessions from its adversaries. In that narrative, Hezbollah\u2019s role is central. Thousands of Hezbollah fighters paid a heavy price during the conflict, making it only natural, from Tehran\u2019s perspective, to view Lebanon through the prism of the party rather than through its state institutions. The Lebanese presidency, government, and official institutions become secondary considerations.<\/p>\n Washington may believe it is negotiating with Iran over broader regional questions, but Tehran continues to see Lebanon as one of its most valuable bargaining chips, both before the memorandum of understanding and after it.<\/p>\n \u2013 Sana Aljak<\/p>\n Against the nature of things<\/p>\n Al-Bayan, UAE, June 20<\/p>\n Europe\u2019s immigration debate reveals a striking contradiction. On the one hand, governments and voters increasingly support restrictions designed to reduce migration. On the other hand, demographic realities suggest that many European economies desperately need more immigrants, not fewer. Germany offers the clearest example. A recent report by the German Economic Institute warns that the country could face a labor shortage exceeding 4.3 million workers by 2036, driven largely by an aging population and declining numbers of working-age citizens.<\/p>\n At the same time, immigration has slowed as successive governments move away from the more welcoming policies associated with Angela Merkel. Many assumed Merkel\u2019s support for immigration was motivated primarily by humanitarian concerns, but the latest figures suggest she also understood its economic necessity.<\/p>\n![\"BILLBOARDS](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/iran\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/727075.jpeg\"\/)
BILLBOARDS SHOW Iran\u2019s new Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei and his late father Ali Khamenei, with the slogan \u2018Thank you to loyal Iran,\u2019 along the highway leading to Rafic Hariri International Airport in Beirut, June 22. (credit: MOHAMED AZAKIR\/REUTERS)<\/p>\n