Thursday, August 27, 2026

Despite war, Iran and Japan have maintained dialogue at all levels, says Japanese ambassador

 By Mona Hojat Ansari

TEHRAN - The Tehran Times often sits down with foreign ambassadors to get updates on their countries' bilateral ties with Iran, as well as their take on the latest global and international issues. In the latest such interaction, the Tehran Times spoke with the Japanese Ambassador to Tehran, Tamaki Tsukada.

Ambassador Tsukada assumed his post in Tehran in October 2023. Prior to this, he held senior positions at Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and spent three decades as a diplomat. Inside Iran, he has become known for promoting cooperation on the restoration of Lake Urmia in northwestern Iran.

But during our interview with him, we focused more on his experience working here as a diplomat throughout two waves of U.S.-Israeli aggression, how the war has affected his country, and how he believes Iran and Japan can grow closer in the coming years.

Below is the full text of the interview, edited for clarity and conciseness:

Since the Tehran Times last spoke with you, the United States and Israel have twice launched war against Iran. As someone living and working here through both confrontations, what has that experience been like for you personally and for your mission?

The war has undoubtedly had a profound impact on both our work and our personal lives. On a personal level, I have been haunted by a strange curse: whenever I am back in Japan—whether on leave or holidaying in a neighboring country—a crisis seems to erupt in Iran. Earlier this year, it appeared the curse would strike again. I was in Japan over the December–January period for my annual leave when the demonstrations began. I cut my holiday short and returned to Tehran to monitor the situation. In hindsight, that marked the beginning of a long and very difficult process of conflict involving Iran, the United States, and other regional countries.

For our embassy collectively, it has also been an exceptionally hard time. Given the level of risk, we decided to raise our travel advisory to the maximum level, which meant advising immediate departure from the country. Consequently, we had to ask all embassy dependents to leave. Currently, only our diplomats and essential staff remain in Tehran; no family members are here. At the height of the heightened situation, particularly during March and April, we were even forced to evacuate some of our diplomats. At that point, we were operating at roughly 50% of our normal staffing levels. Since July, however, we have recovered almost 100% of our activities and are now functioning at near-normal levels, although a few staff members continue to work online from Japan. Staffing has seen many ups and downs, and our dependents remain in Japan. Bilateral activities have been seriously constrained by the war, making this an extraordinarily difficult period—not just for us, but for everyone. For our embassy, it has been an abnormal situation, to say the least.

The most vivid experience I had was during a meeting with my counterpart at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In the midst of our conversation, we suddenly noticed a cruise missile flying just outside the window. My counterpart, the Director General, grabbed my arm and urged me to lower my body to avoid any danger. It was an immediate and very real experience of being in a war zone. Literally, it was a once-in-a-lifetime experience to hear the noise and reverberation of a cruise missile passing so close. It was terrifying, yet it also brought a stark realization of the gravity of our situation and a conviction that we must do our utmost, in our respective capacities, to contain it. I sincerely hope none of us ever have to experience that again.

War inevitably complicates cooperation—especially between countries that did not already share extensive ties. With that in mind, how would you assess the evolution of Iran-Japan relations over the past year?

Frankly speaking, our bilateral relationship has been severely constrained by the external situation. Nevertheless, despite these limitations, we have managed to maintain dialogue at all levels, including the highest. Most recently, just a few days ago, there was a very productive telephone conversation between our Prime Minister and President Pezeshkian. At the foreign ministerial level, our Foreign Minister, Mr. Motegi, and his counterpart, Dr. Araghchi, have held eight telephone conversations since the onset of the 40-day war. We are doing our utmost to sustain dialogue at all levels, ensuring that we clearly understand each other’s thinking. Where necessary, we remain ready to offer our help to ease the situation.

Of course, it would be unrealistic to expect economic and commercial ties to recover overnight; that will take some time. However, we hope that thanks to our traditional relationship of trust, we are in a better position than many countries to restart our activities when conditions become ripe.

How have the Japanese government and the Japanese public reacted to these wars—both in terms of official policy and popular sentiment?

You may recall that at the very early stage of the military operations, the Government of Japan was among the first to publicly denounce the military action. Throughout the crisis, we have continuously called upon all parties—not only the primary protagonists but also neighboring countries—to do their utmost to contain the situation and de-escalate. While we are not a direct party to the conflict, we consider it our duty, as a responsible member of the international community, to play our own role in bringing reason and a sense of restraint to the warring parties. That has been our consistent effort at the governmental level.

At the popular level, the impact has also been tangible. Prices have risen—gasoline, gas station products, and other items such as plastics have all become more expensive. These increases have affected daily life across the board, allowing people to feel the consequences of the region’s difficulties. We are all interconnected, and our economies are interdependent. Japan, in particular, relies heavily on energy imports from the Middle East; roughly 90% of our oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz. In that sense, I believe Japan was one of the few countries that felt the war’s impact very keenly and acutely.

Japan has traditionally played a mediating role in international disputes. Given that history, and the fact that Iran's foreign minister has a special relationship with Japan, do you see any realistic opening for Tokyo to facilitate de-escalation between Iran and the U.S.?

Mediation is a very sensitive issue, so I must choose my words carefully to avoid being misquoted or misinterpreted. We greatly appreciate Dr. Araghchi’s special attachment to Japan and Iran’s expectations regarding a potential mediating role for Tokyo. However, realistically speaking, I think it is premature to say anything concrete about direct intervention in this conflict at this moment. This is my personal view, but for mediation to be meaningful and effective, there must first be a minimum level of trust between the conflicting parties—trust toward each other. Frankly, at this point, trust between Iran and the United States is very low—perhaps not zero, but certainly minimal. In such a low-trust environment, even a saint or a superhuman mediator would find it nearly impossible to succeed.

The first requirement, as I see it, is for both sides—and this will require tremendous political courage—to prepare their domestic audiences for the necessity of some sacrifice in order to make the first move. Currently, both sides seem to insist that the other must act first, with any reaction contingent upon that initial step. As long as this stalemate persists, I do not foresee any meaningful compromise.

Despite war, Iran and Japan have maintained dialogue at all levels, says Japanese ambassador 

I understand the domestic constraints on both sides: in the U.S., there are midterm elections and electoral considerations; in Iran, there is deep-seated grief over the loss of the Supreme Leader, along with significant anger and animosity toward the adversary. I fully appreciate these pressures. But unless political leaders on both sides find the courage to address their domestic constituencies and make the first move, mediation will remain exceedingly difficult.

Beyond the diplomacy, what has it been like for you to experience daily life here—engaging with ordinary Iranians, navigating local culture, and witnessing their day-to-day realities? How has that shaped your own perspective on this country and its people?

Roughly once a month, I visit my regular hairdresser, a young man in his mid-20s, and we have very pleasant chats. He has interesting opinions on everything—daily life, sometimes politics, even diplomacy. I greatly value this opportunity to gauge the mood of ordinary Iranians, especially the younger generation—what they feel and how they perceive the situation. For a diplomat, it is not only about conversing with government counterparts; engaging in small talk with ordinary people and understanding public sentiment is equally important. I cherish these conversations with this young man.

It has been particularly interesting to observe the evolution of his opinions from the very beginning of the war, through the height of the crisis, and now into this period of stalemate. I sense a strong mixture of emotions: frustration, patriotism, and also a degree of desperation. Through these conversations, I am able to empathize with the general public, and I believe that is an invaluable experience for diplomats—to have the opportunity to interact with ordinary citizens on the street.

Finally, looking ahead to the upcoming Asian Games in Nagoya, how do you think the event can impact cultural ties between Iran and Japan? Could you also update us on the current visa process for Iranian participants, and what broader opportunities do you see for expanding cultural and people-to-people exchanges between our two nations through the Games?

First, regarding visas and administrative procedures, everything is progressing smoothly this time. The Asian Competition Committee has made special arrangements for participating countries, including Iran, to dispense with the usual visa process. Instead, they are introducing a special accreditation system. Athletes will not need to go through the standard visa application; rather, they will be issued a dedicated entry card for the Games. This will dramatically reduce bureaucracy and shorten entry times, which we hope will greatly facilitate the movement of athletes and support staff from the Iranian delegation.

As for the broader impact on exchanges between Iran and Japan through the Asian Games, sports have always been a wonderful vehicle for uniting people across different cultures—and this time is no exception. Especially during this very difficult period of war, I believe sports can provide a positive and uplifting environment. Iran is a highly athletically advanced country, and we fully expect that it will win many medals and rank very high in the medal tally. We hope that such strong performances will boost morale and help restore a sense of national pride. More than that, I hope it will give people a chance to embrace and celebrate the country in a spirit of goodwill.

Overall, I have great hopes that the Asian Games will have a positive impact not only on the psychology of the Iranian people but also on the broader political and regional environment.

Six months of US miscalculations in Iran

TEHRAN — Six months after Washington ignited an unprovoked and reckless war against Iran, the sheer magnitude of American strategic blindness has been laid bare for the world to see. 

What was arrogant American rhetoric promising a "six-week operation" to dismantle Iran’s defensive capabilities and force capitulation has devolved into a protracted, humiliating nightmare for the White House. 

Recent revelations published by Western media outlets, notably The Wall Street Journal, confirm what Tehran has maintained from the outset: the United States entered this conflict bound by deep strategic miscalculations, completely duped by Israeli instigations and its own delusional fantasy that the Iranian nation would collapse under pressure.  Even within the halls of American intelligence, clear warnings were issued to President Donald Trump regarding the catastrophic foolishness of launching an assault. 

Days before the initial attack on February 28, then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard explicitly warned the Oval Office against military aggression. Intelligence assessments presented by Gabbard directly contested the reckless narrative pushed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who sought to trap Washington into fighting Israel’s battles.  Gabbard plainly informed Trump that any attempt to target Iran’s high leadership—specifically the assassination of Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei—would backfire disastrously. The intelligence chief warned that such hostile acts would only fortify Iran’s revolutionary resolve, ushering in a far more hard-line posture fully prepared to advance its national defense and nuclear posture to protect sovereignty. 

Gabbard further cautioned the White House that the Islamic Republic possessed the absolute capability and willpower to choke off the strategic Strait of Hormuz, throwing global energy markets into turmoil, while inflicting severe casualties on overstretched US occupation forces across the region.  Yet, blinded by the bellicose promises of Pentagon figures like War Secretary Pete Hegseth and seduced by foreign warmongers, Trump dismissed these intelligence warnings. He was thoroughly duped into believing that the Iranian government was on the verge of falling apart and that a swift blitzkrieg would yield an easy victory. 

The early days of the conflict saw hollow celebrations in Florida resorts, where American politicians cheered reports of aggression without realizing they had stepped into an inescapable quagmire.  Six months later, reality has shattered Washington’s illusions. Iran’s military maintains control over the nation’s defense apparatus and maritime territory, effectively dictating terms in the Persian Gulf and demonstrating that Iranian sovereignty cannot be compromised. 

The succession of Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei as Leader stands as a monumental defeat for Western planners who anticipated chaos; instead, they face a unified, unyielding leadership that refuses to yield to imperialist demands.  The military and economic cost exacted upon the United States has been staggering. Washington’s forces have suffered humiliation on multiple fronts, incurring 18 dead service members and over 750 wounded troops, alongside extensive physical damage to US military bases throughout West Asia.  

The relentless operational tempo has drained American strategic oil reserves, severely depleted US precision munitions stockpiles, and exposed the profound vulnerabilities of American warships navigating waters defended by Iranian anti-ship technology and tactical naval mines.  

Economically, the closing of the Strait of Hormuz demonstrated Tehran’s capacity to leverage global trade dynamics, halting one-fifth of global oil and gas supply and driving fuel prices to unbearable heights across Western economies.

 The resulting domestic chaos in America has shattered political consensus, leaving Trump’s approval ratings at record lows while panic spreads through the Republican Party ahead of upcoming elections.  Having failed on the battlefield and seeing its military capabilities ground down by Iran’s active resistance, the White House has resorted once again to economic coercion—dubbing its latest desperate measure "Operation Economic Outcast". This shift back to a naval blockade and economic warfare is nothing more than a tacit admission of military defeat. Trump’s insistence on demanding "regime change" or complete surrender via economic asphyxiation is merely the repeated application of a failed doctrine.  The stubborn insistence by the US administration that it can force Iran to its knees reveals an incredible inability to comprehend the endurance of the Iranian nation. 

As regional leaders push Washington to seek an off-ramp and American internal polling shows a vast majority demanding an immediate end to the conflict, the reality remains clear: Iran’s defense posture remains unshaken, its retaliation has imposed immense costs on the aggressors, and Washington’s military adventure will go down in history as a monumental miscalculation born of supreme arrogance and flawed intelligence.  

Iran urges UN, member states to reject US economic terrorism; calls US ‘a rogue state’

Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has called on the United Nations Security Council and member states to reject the new US campaign of economic terrorism against Iran, arguing that Washington is seeking to force other countries to abandon lawful economic relations with Tehran through threats of secondary sanctions.

In a letter addressed to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, the Security Council’s president, and UN member states on Wednesday, the top diplomat said the measures announced by the United States recently under the so-called banner of “Operation Economic Expulsion” amounted to an attempt to impose US policy on sovereign states.

Araghchi urged the UN to condemn the measures, refrain from recognizing or implementing them, and press Washington to end threats and coercive measures against countries maintaining economic relations with the Islamic Republic.

‘US trying to impose its will extraterritorially’

According to the letter, the stated purpose of the US campaign is to end lawful economic relations with Iran by threatening third countries and entities with secondary sanctions and restrictions on access to the US financial system.

Araghchi argued that such measures amount to an effort to apply US laws and foreign-policy objectives beyond US territory and to compel other governments to change their independent economic policies.

Araghchi noted that the measures feature sanctions against individuals and entities “regardless of where they are located,” describing the drive as an attempt to constrain the economic decisions of other sovereign states through unilateral decisions made in Washington.

The foreign minister also argued that continued use of such measures could not establish a legal right to exercise unlimited extraterritorial jurisdiction, saying their purpose was to pressure third countries into adopting restrictions they had not independently accepted.

Humanitarian consequences

A central part of the letter concerned the impact of the US measures on Iranian civilians.

Araghchi denounced the United States for deliberately targeting civilians and said the measures were structured in a way that they would circumvent protections afforded to civilians under international law.

He said restrictions affecting access to food, medicine, medical equipment, energy, and other basic necessities could have consequences for rights, including the rights to life, health, food, and an adequate standard of living.

Araghchi asked the UN chief to examine their impact on access to food, medicine, healthcare, energy, transportation, humanitarian assistance, and other conditions necessary for a dignified life. He further called for relevant evidence to be preserved for possible future accountability proceedings.

The official also invoked a 2018 judgment and order of the International Court of Justice, arguing that the newly announced measures represented a departure from the court's ruling.

The letter recalled that on October 3 that year, the court unanimously ordered the United States to guarantee the freedom of export to Iran of “(1) medicines and medical devices; (2) foodstuffs and agricultural commodities; and (3) spare parts, equipment, and associated services (including warranty, maintenance, repair, and inspection services) necessary for the safety of civil aviation.”

According to the letter, the same order also required the United States to issue necessary licenses and authorizations and facilitate the transfer of related payments and other funds.

According to Araghchi, contravention of the ruling on the part of Washington carries serious consequences for the Iranian population.

Iran’s demands

The foreign minister presented three principal requests to the Security Council and UN membership.

First, he called for the condemnation and rejection of unilateral coercive measures and secondary sanctions intended to pressure sovereign states into changing their lawful economic relations.

Second, the official urged countries not to recognize, endorse or implement measures that would link their sovereign economic decisions to policies determined unilaterally by the United States.

Third, he called on the United States to immediately end threats and coercive measures aimed at compelling third countries and their nationals to change their economic relations and interests.

‘A decisive moment for UN, member states’

Araghchi described the issue at hand as a broader test of the UN Charter's principles, writing that a “decisive moment” had arrived for the Security Council and UN member states.

He said the choice was between defending “the principles of sovereign equality, non-intervention, and respect for the sovereign rights of states” and submission to “the unilateralism and bullying of a rogue state.”

The letter also set out Iran's intention to pursue legal and diplomatic avenues over unlawful US measures.

Araghchi said Iran “reserves its right to pursue all available avenues to secure accountability, reparation, and redress,” and argued that the United States should bear responsibility for material and moral damage caused by the measures.

He said such responsibility could include restitution, compensation, and satisfaction in accordance with international law.

The letter further stated that the United States bears international responsibility and, where the relevant legal elements are established, individual criminal responsibility for consequences arising from unlawful measures targeting the Islamic Republic.

Araghchi concluded by asking Guterres to circulate the letter as an official document of the Security Council.

Explainer: Which Persian Gulf power plants fueling US war machine are in Iran’s crosshairs

By Press TV Website Staff 

The recent bellicose threats by the megalomaniac American president against Iran's energy infrastructure have taken on new strategic dimensions when examined through the lens of America's regional military architecture. 

A detailed review of US military installations across the Persian Gulf reveals a critical dependency on local power plants that has received little public attention.

It boils down to the deep reliance of key American military bases in the region, from the United Arab Emirates to Saudi Arabia, on the power grids of their host countries. 

This interconnection creates a complex web of strategic interdependence, where any potential disruption to regional energy networks carries direct implications for American military operations throughout West Asia.

The United States maintains a sprawling network of forward operating bases across the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council states, installations that serve as the backbone of American air power, surveillance capabilities, and the accompanying destabilisation activities.

From these bases, US occupation forces project power over all countries in the region while also monitoring Iranian military activities along the Strait of Hormuz and the Arabian Sea. 

However, what is less frequently acknowledged is the extent to which these military installations depend on host-nation civilian infrastructure to sustain their operational readiness.

A closer examination of four major power generation facilities – located in the United Arab Emirates, Dubai, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia – illustrates this vulnerability in concrete terms. 

These plants collectively generate tens of thousands of megawatts of electricity, and each one serves as the significant power source for a nearby American base. In each case, the base's ability to maintain flight operations, command-and-control systems, and personnel support services is directly tied to the uninterrupted functioning of a single power facility.

The implications of this dependency are significant for any analysis of regional security dynamics. Any disruption to these power plants, whether through technical failure, cyberattack, or retaliatory military action, would directly impact and derail the operational capacity of American occupation forces at Al Dhafra, Al Minhad, Al Udeid, and Prince Sultan Air Base. 

These four installations, as first reported by Fars News Agency, represent the backbone of America's military presence in the Persian Gulf, hosting everything from strategic reconnaissance drones to the forward headquarters of US air operations across two continents.

The evidence points to a clear conclusion: the civilian energy infrastructure of America's Persian Gulf partners is not merely a matter of domestic utility but a critical component of the US military posture in the region, and a factor that must be accounted for in any assessment of the balance of power between Iran and its adversaries.

Al Tawelah: Beating heart of Abu Dhabi

Sixty kilometers southwest of Abu Dhabi's gleaming skyscrapers, where the urban sprawl dissolves into a harshscape of sand and salt flats, stands the Al Tawelah power and water complex.

It is a monument to Emirati ambition, a sprawling industrial colossus that produces 6,000 megawatts of electricity, enough to power a small European nation. That figure represents fully 12 percent of the entire country’s electrical output.

But Al Tawelah's true significance lies not in its contribution to Emirati civilian households or the air-conditioned malls of Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Sharjah. Its most critical client sits just 40 kilometers to the west: Al Dhafra Air Base.

Al Dhafra is not merely another American military outpost in the region. It is a strategic dagger pointed squarely at Iran and its allies. From this desert aerodrome, US Air Force RQ-4 Global Hawks – the massive, unarmed reconnaissance drones with their distinctive bulbous noses – conduct surveillance missions.

The base also hosts F-35 Lightning II fighters, the most advanced combat aircraft in the American arsenal, alongside a rotating cast of tanker aircraft that refuel bombers over the skies of Syria, Iraq, and the Strait of Hormuz.

There is a history between Al Dhafra and Iran. In June 2019, Iranian air defenses shot down a Global Hawk operating in the region, an act that escalated tensions. The message was clear: Iran knows exactly where America's prying eyes are, and it has the capability to blind them.

But Al Dhafra's vulnerability extends beyond the runway. Its computers, its radar systems, its air traffic control, the climate-controlled hangars that protect its multi-million-dollar aircraft from the brutal Persian Gulf heat – all of it depends on a steady and uninterrupted flow of electricity from Al Tawelah power plant.

Any disruption at the power plant would not merely dim the military base's lights but it would also silence its early warning systems, degrade its communications, and ground its fleet. The Global Hawks would become expensive paperweights, their sensors inert, and their pilots helpless.

Iranian military strategists have certainly mapped this dependency. Al Tawelah, with its exposed transmission lines snaking across open desert, represents a single point of failure for one of America's most important aerial reconnaissance hubs. It is a vulnerability that Emirati and American engineers work tirelessly to protect, and one that Tehran has undoubtedly factored into its strategic calculations.

Al Tawelah, Abu Dhabi

DEWA: The artery of Dubai

Further north, where the Persian Gulf's turquoise waters meet the shores of Jebel Ali, the Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA) power complex lies with a massive space.

Its capacity of 9,650 megawatts is staggering, enough to provide 85 percent of the electricity consumed by Dubai's 3.5 million residents and the endless parade of tourists who flock to its luxury resorts and shopping malls.

But DEWA's most important customer is not the Burj Khalifa or the Palm Jumeirah. It is Al Minhad Air Base of the US military, located approximately 50 kilometers south of Dubai's city center.

Al Minhad is a crucial node in America's southern Persian Gulf military presence, serving as a logistics and staging hub for military operations across the region. It is here that cargo planes land, troops rotate, and supplies are distributed to more forward-deployed units. During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Al Minhad was a vital transit point, processing hundreds of thousands of personnel and millions of tons of equipment.

Unlike Al Dhafra, which bristles with offensive firepower, Al Minhad's role is more logistical but no less critical. It is the supply chain's beating heart. Without it, the entire American logistical network in the southern region of the Persian Gulf would begin to fray. Aircraft could not be refueled. Personnel could not be rotated. The sustained presence that defines America's regional posture would become unsustainable.

All of it depends on DEWA. The power plant's massive transmission lines run beneath the desert, carrying electricity to air conditioning units that keep sensitive electronics cool, to computers that track global supply chains, to radar installations that protect the base's perimeter. A strike on DEWA's generating capacity, or the substations that connect it to Al Minhad, would not merely inconvenience the base but would sever its operational lifeline.

DEWA, Dubai

Ras Laffan: Nerve center of American air power

For the most dramatic illustration of this strategic interdependence, one must travel to Qatar's eastern coast, where the Ras Laffan Industrial City rises from the desert like a metallic mirage.

This is the heart of Qatar's energy empire, a complex of natural gas liquefaction plants, petrochemical facilities, and the Ras Laffan power station, which generates around 4,511 megawatts of electricity.

But Ras Laffan's true importance lies not in the gas it exports to Asian markets but in the power it sends to Al Udeid Air Base, located approximately 40 kilometers southwest of Doha. 

Al Udeid, which has come under Iranian retaliatory strikes in recent months, is considered the crown jewel of America's military presence in the region, the largest US military installation in West Asia and the forward headquarters of US Central Command's (CENTCOM) air operations.

From Al Udeid's sprawling runways, American and coalition aircraft have in the past launched attacks on Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. The base hosts B-1B Lancer bombers, KC-135 tankers, and a constellation of surveillance and strike aircraft that provide the US with air superiority across two continents. 

Its Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) is the brain of American air power in the region, a windowless, heavily fortified nerve center where airmen track every aircraft in the sky, coordinate strikes, and direct the flow of war from the Arabian Gulf to the Mediterranean.

The CAOC's banks of computers, its satellite communications arrays, its real-time data links to ships, submarines, and ground forces – all of it requires vast quantities of electricity. A disruption at Ras Laffan would not merely inconvenience Al Udeid but would paralyse the CAOC, severing the connection between pilots in the air and commanders on the ground. 

The base's aircraft would still be able to fly, but they would do so without the coordination and intelligence that make them lethal. American air power, for all its sophistication, would be reduced to a collection of isolated platforms, each operating in a fog of confusion.

Iranian military strategists have long recognized Al Udeid's centrality to American military adventurism. The base has been a priority target, its runways and command centers simulated in computer models and military exercises. 

But Ras Laffan offers an alternative point of leverage, an energy infrastructure target that would be far more difficult to defend than the base's hardened bunkers. A single precision strike on the power station's transformers or transmission lines could cripple America's air operations across the region.

Ras Laffan, Qatar

Riyadh: Powering kingdom’s American shield

Saudi Arabia hosts what may perhaps be the most sensitive American military asset on the Arabian Peninsula: Prince Sultan Air Base, located near the town of Al Kharj, approximately 80 kilometers south of Riyadh. 

This sprawling facility, with its reinforced aircraft shelters, deep ammunition bunkers, and extensive runway network, has been the centerpiece of America's military relationship with the Kingdom since the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Today, this base serves as a key hub for American air operations in the Persian Gulf, hosting fighter squadrons, surveillance aircraft, and support personnel. Its location deep inside Saudi territory provides it with a degree of protection that forward-deployed bases in smaller Persian Gulf states lack, but this comes with a trade-off: the base is almost entirely dependent on the Riyadh power grid for its electricity.

The Riyadh power station, with its capacity of 9,636 megawatts, supplies the vast majority of the Saudi capital's electricity. But Prince Sultan, with its radar arrays, air defense systems, and climate-controlled aircraft hangars dependent on the power plant, draws a significant portion of this output. Any disruption in the grid would leave the American base vulnerable.

This vulnerability is particularly acute because Prince Sultan base is not just a logistics hub or a staging ground. It is a defensive bulwark, guarding the Kingdom's skies. Its air defense radars and interceptor aircraft are the first line of defense against any airborne incursion. If the power fails, so too does the shield.

Saudi leadership has invested billions in American military technology to protect its sovereignty, but that technology is powerless without the electricity that flows from Riyadh's civilian energy infrastructure.

A threat to Iran's power grid is, in effect, a threat to the very systems that protect America's most important Persian Gulf ally.

Riyadh power station

The web of Interdependence

Together, these four power plants – Al Tawelah, DEWA, Ras Laffan, and Riyadh – form a critical power infrastructure network that sustains American military power across the Persian Gulf. 

They are not merely civilian utilities but the hidden pillars of the US military architecture in the region. Each one represents a point of vulnerability that Iranian military strategists have undoubtedly identified and put on the list.

This interdependence creates a form of mutual deterrence that is rarely acknowledged in public discourse. For every threat against Iran's nuclear facilities or oil export terminals, there exists a reciprocal capability to disrupt the electricity that powers America's regional military presence. 

An attack on Iranian energy infrastructure would invite a response that targets the energy systems of regional countries – and by extension, the American occupation bases that depend on them.

The Persian Gulf states understand this vulnerability well. In recent years, they have invested heavily in grid hardening, backup systems, and renewable energy sources to reduce their exposure. But the fundamental reality is that their strategic relationship with the United States is built on the same fragile foundation of electricity that flows from a handful of massive, exposed power plants.

For the United States, the implication is equally clear. Its vaunted military supremacy is not self-contained but dependent on the goodwill, stability, and infrastructure of its Persian Gulf partners. The F-35s and Global Hawks are only as effective as the power plants that keep them running.

And those power plants, for all their modern sophistication, remain vulnerable to the same kinds of asymmetric threats that Iran has mastered over decades of asymmetric warfare.

China’s economic soft power in the age of connectivity

 By Mahdi Zolfaghari

Over the past two decades, China has evolved from an economy largely driven by mass production and industrial exports into a more complex actor in the global economy. It is no longer defined solely by low prices and high export volumes; rather, it exerts influence on international economic dynamics through a combination of industrial capacity, deeply integrated supply chains, emerging technologies, and an extensive network of overseas investment.

According to World Trade Organization data, China remains among the world’s largest merchandise exporters, with the value of its goods exports reaching approximately $3.77 trillion in 2025. This figure suggests that China’s weight in global trade has not only been maintained but has deepened in several sectors.

Yet China’s commercial power cannot be reduced merely to export figures. Beijing’s principal advantage lies in its integration across the value chain. China is not simply an exporter of finished products; it also plays a decisive role in the supply of raw materials, intermediate components, assembly, logistics, and even industrial standard-setting. This characteristic has left many global industries—from electronics and machinery to renewable-energy technologies—still dependent on China’s production networks. At a time when the world faces geopolitical shocks, tariffs, and “de-risking” policies, China has sought to enhance its trade resilience by diversifying its markets and strengthening domestic demand.

In the sphere of technology and emerging industries, China is no longer merely an exporter of garments and consumer goods. It is consolidating its position in batteries, electric vehicles, solar panels, telecommunications equipment, and industrial artificial intelligence. The International Energy Agency indicates that China stands at the center of growing demand for and production of electric-vehicle batteries, making this industry one of the country’s new instruments of economic influence. This trend has created competitive advantages and new avenues of influence for Chinese companies, particularly in the markets of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

Meanwhile, China’s outward investment has also become an important tool for expanding its economic reach. In recent years, Chinese companies have moved beyond an exclusive focus on exporting goods and toward establishing factories, forming industrial partnerships, acquiring assets, and developing distribution networks abroad. This shift brings China’s image closer to that of a “global manufacturer and investor” rather than merely a major trader. At the same time, this trajectory is accompanied by challenges, including security sensitivities, technological restrictions, and intense competition in advanced markets.

In conclusion, China’s commercial power appears set to remain highly influential, though not in a simple or linear manner. The country’s path is shifting from the accumulation of volume toward improving quality, controlling supply chains, and gaining prominence in strategic industries. If China can strike a balance between export growth, technological innovation, and the management of trade tensions, it will remain one of the principal pillars of the global economy—a pillar that exports not only goods, but also a new model of economic power.

Mahdi Zolfaghari is  PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Asian Studies, Allameh Tabataba’i University

MAHAK builds a broader ecosystem around pediatric cancer care

By Mehdi Garshasbi

TEHRAN - The Society to Support Children Suffering from Cancer, widely known by its acronym MAHAK, was established in 1991 as a non-governmental and non-profit organization.

Its logo, a leaf symbolizing life, depicts a child and family standing upon it with hope.

Since its inception, MAHAK has relied solely on public donations, benevolent intentions, and voluntary contributions. Within less than a decade, MAHAK succeeded in improving children’s recovery rates by applying scientific and specialized methods in caring for patients and their families, while also earning the trust and support of the public as well as the tireless efforts of volunteers.

MAHAK’s activities fall into three main categories: Charity, Hospital, and Research. These efforts exclusively serve children with cancer in areas such as medical care, prevention, treatment, healthcare, and welfare services. MAHAK’s slogan, “Help us and let us help you,” reflects the essential role of civil society in supporting humanity with love and compassion.

By 2025, MAHAK had provided comprehensive support to over 45,000 children with cancer and their families across Iran.

In an exclusive interview with the Tehran Times, Arasb Ahmadian, the chief executive officer, elaborated on MAHAK’s role in the global fight against childhood cancer, how it integrates psychological and social support into cancer care, the role of emerging technologies, artificial intelligence, and digital health in the future of cancer care at MAHAK.

MAHAK has developed an integrated model that combines medical treatment, psychosocial and family support, public awareness, research, advocacy, and international cooperation.

One of MAHAK’s most important contributions is its emphasis on comprehensive and patient-centered care. The organization initially focused on supporting families of children with cancer, including providing accommodation for families who had to travel to Tehran for their children’s treatment.

As the organization developed, this approach expanded into the establishment of a specialized pediatric cancer hospital and treatment center, providing diagnostic, therapeutic, and supportive services.

This integrated approach is particularly relevant to the global childhood-cancer agenda. In this respect, MAHAK’s experience demonstrates how a civil-society organization can contribute to building a broader ecosystem around pediatric cancer care.

The distinctive feature of MAHAK is its attempt to address the medical and social dimensions of childhood cancer simultaneously. Many childhood-cancer charities primarily concentrate on fundraising, awareness, or family assistance, while MAHAK has developed an ecosystem in which financial support, medical services, family assistance, awareness campaigns, research, and professional collaboration are interconnected.

Therefore, MAHAK’s role in the global fight against childhood cancer can be understood as that of a patient- and family-centered civil-society organization that connects charity, healthcare delivery, social support, awareness, research, and international collaboration.

Rather than viewing childhood cancer solely as a medical problem, the MAHAK model treats it as a multidimensional social and healthcare challenge. This perspective is consistent with the broader global movement toward equitable access to quality pediatric cancer care, in which international cooperation, capacity building, family engagement, and knowledge sharing are increasingly considered essential components of improving survival and quality of life.

Integrating psychological and social support into cancer care

MAHAK’s approach is based on the principle that treating childhood cancer is not limited to medical intervention. A diagnosis of cancer can affect a child’s emotional well-being, family relationships, education, financial stability, and ability to cope with a long and demanding treatment process. MAHAK therefore seeks to integrate psychological and social support with medical treatment rather than treating these services as separate or optional forms of assistance.

MAHAK builds a broader ecosystem around pediatric cancer care

An important aspect of this approach is that psychological care is not restricted to children. Parents and caregivers are also considered part of the care process because their emotional condition, ability to cope, and understanding of the illness can influence the child's experience of treatment. MAHAK has consequently focused on integrating psychological and social-work services into its broader support system.

The psychosocial model at MAHAK also includes a substantial social-support component. Its services extend beyond the hospital itself and include support for families receiving treatment in public and university hospitals across Iran. MAHAK's support has included assistance with treatment costs, medicines, transportation, and accommodation for families who have to travel for specialized treatment.

Another important characteristic of MAHAK's approach is multidisciplinary cooperation. Psychological and social support is intended to operate alongside physicians, nurses, and other healthcare professionals rather than independently of the medical team.

Preserving the child's quality of life and sense of childhood

MAHAK's approach also recognizes that children with cancer remain children first. Its activities seek to preserve opportunities for children to experience normal childhood emotions and activities despite the restrictions imposed by illness and treatment. MAHAK has explicitly emphasized the importance of creating positive memories for children so that their experience of childhood is not defined exclusively by pain and medical procedures.

This perspective is consistent with the broader international understanding of psychosocial pediatric oncology, in which quality of life, emotional adjustment, family functioning, and the child's ability to cope with treatment are considered important outcomes alongside survival.

The significance of this model is that it addresses the whole experience of childhood cancer. The disease affects the child's body, but its consequences extend to emotions, family relationships, education, finances, and social life.

Role of emerging technologies

The future of childhood cancer care at MAHAK is likely to be increasingly influenced by digital transformation, artificial intelligence (AI), telemedicine, and data-driven healthcare. These technologies should not be viewed as replacements for physicians, nurses, psychologists, or social workers; rather, their greatest potential lies in strengthening MAHAK’s existing integrated model of care and making specialized services more accessible, personalized, and continuous.

MAHAK builds a broader ecosystem around pediatric cancer care

AI could become particularly important in areas such as diagnosis, risk assessment, treatment planning, prediction of complications, and analysis of medical data. International research in pediatric oncology has already identified applications of AI in diagnostic and prognostic decision-making, although the evidence is still developing and implementation requires careful validation.

AI could also support MAHAK's psychosocial model. For example, digital systems could help identify changes in reported symptoms, emotional well-being, treatment adherence, or quality-of-life indicators and alert healthcare professionals when additional intervention may be appropriate.

Another major opportunity is the development of patient-centered digital health platforms. Mobile applications could enable children and parents to record symptoms, medication schedules, side effects, appointments, and other aspects of their treatment journey.

Digital transformation could also strengthen MAHAK's capacity for research and personalized cancer care. A well-designed clinical database can bring together information about diagnosis, treatment, outcomes, complications, and long-term follow-up.