Aug 10, 2020, 11:04 AM

Analyst:

Anti-Iran position will be to PGCC's own detriment

Anti-Iran position will be to PGCC's own detriment

TEHRAN, Aug. 10 (MNA) – An analyst said that Persian Gulf Cooperation Council will lose its own interests for the sake of US and Zionist Regime by providing propaganda space for them and complying with them in extending arm embargo on Iran.

Reacting to the letter of the Secretary-General of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council to UN Security Council on extending the embargo against Iran, Sabbah Zangane said that “the Secretary-General's compliance with the United States as well as his propaganda and the political statement has no bearing on the views and approaches of major countries such as China and Russia.”

Referring to China and Russia as competitors of the US in the arms market, he noted that when the arms embargo against Iran expires, China and Russia will have their own market in Iran and the region, without caring about positions of the Secretary-General of the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council.

He also asserted that the important fact is that the Islamic Republic of Iran makes most of its weapons domestically, and its weapons are not in violation of international law.

In response to a question about the goals of the mentioned letter to the Security Council and agreeing with the United States to extend Iran's arms embargo, Zangane said that “Arab states still intend to continue the tension with the Islamic Republic of Iran, but they should know that these methods will not create positive interests in the region."

The Persian Gulf Cooperation Council is trying to provide more propaganda space for the United States in the region and, also, to win the heart of the Zionist regime. Maybe these tactics were useful and effective in the past, however in the current situation these old fashioned tactics would be against its own interests in the current situation, and absolutely it would be looser for the sake of the Zionists, he said.

RHM/IRN83901610

News ID 162058

Tags

Your Comment

You are replying to: .
  • captcha