The American newspaper the Washington Post is trying to answer the question of what makes the Iranian spiritual leader such a unique politician, in an article entitled "The strategic genius of Iran’s supreme leader". Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is often criticized by Western leaders and analysts for his hard policy and principles in relation to Israel, as well as his control over the civil society of Iran, which is unacceptable for the European Union and the United States. But every country in the world accepts the fact that the spiritual leader of Iran, like no other, is able to achieve his goals, which he demonstrates in the course of lobbying for Iran's nuclear program.
It would seem that everyone except Khamenei understands that the only way for the Islamic Republic is an agreement to reduce its nuclear program. Further sanctions may exacerbate the economic problems, which could cause discontent in the country, but for Khamenei Western intervention in the internal affairs of the state is forbidden, which he does not accept. The spiritual leader follows his principles and continues to insist that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, and its nuclear program is entirely peaceful. And such a radical position has led to the fact that Iran has been granted the right to develop energy infrastructure. But what does Iran want? And what does the West want to achieve?
For Iran, everything is clear: for the republic the most important thing is to defend its freedom in decision-making in domestic political persuasion, without the intervention of other powers. And the United States, in its turn, is still trying to have an impact on all countries that are somehow included in the zone of their interests. And Khamenei has every chance of winning in this confrontation, because America simply does not have enough resources to control the whole nuclear infrastructure of Iran, with hundreds of strategic facilities, thousands of scientists and workers in this sector. In addition, the Iranian Republic is the most developed and influential Gulf state, with a strong economic and political base, and largely thanks to the simple cleric Khamenei.
Another article in the Washington Post is about the reaction of the leader of Cyprus to post of the US ambassador about Russia "US ambassador’s Cyprus-Russia tweet upsets Cypriot president". Trying to use every opportunity to darken the image of Russia and its allies, Western diplomats sometimes go too far. After the message on Twitter that the visit of the President of Cyprus to Russia was linked to the murder of Boris Nemtsov, Anastasiades accused the ambassador of being undiplomatic, and said that the US by such actions only increases the gap between themselves and other countries.
The row and noise that followed the message was predictable. But there is a question - what is the aim of the US? The fact is that the leader of Cyprus signed a military-strategic partnership with Russia. It becomes clear that any cooperation in this area is a kind of counterweight to NATO that at least worries the American diplomats.
Anastasiades, in turn, has always been an ally of the United States, but the latest twist in diplomatic relations could seriously change the balance of power in the political arena.
In an article "New Saudi king meets Turkey leader amid thaw in relations", the Washington Post’s analysts are trying to understand the change of policy of both countries, which has escaped their attention earlier. The new king of Saudi Arabia and the President of Turkey are looking for ways to work together and solve regional issues for the first time in many years of very cold diplomatic relations between the two states. It turned out that the leaders of both nations shared views on the political and economic development of the region, and have every opportunity to reach a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Syria and Egypt, and confront the terrorist threat. In place of confrontation and frustration comes cooperation and mutual understanding, which in its turn will help to maintain balance, both in economic and political terms in a very troubled eastern region.
