Iranupdated 1h ago3 min read
Iran Denies Chabahar Land Transfer After Mohsen Zanganeh Says Afghanistan Gets 110 Hectares
This article is an automated aggregation of coverage from news outlets. Our editorials offer in-depth analysis curated by the NewsCord team.
Iran's Foreign Ministry says no Iranian territory will be transferred to Afghanistan over Chabahar. Reports claim Iran allocated more than 110 hectares at Chabahar to Afghanistan for economic activities.
Chabahar land dispute
Iran’s debate over an Iran-Afghanistan economic understanding at Chabahar Port erupted after Mohsen Zanganeh, a representative of Tarbatheh, said in an interview with Sabāh Afghanistan network that Iran would allocate about 10 hectares of land beside the waters of the Chabahar port and more than 100 hectares in the special economic zone for Afghanistan. Mohsen Zanganeh later denied land transfer to Afghanistan and said, "I announced that based on the agreement, 10 hectares of land in the Chabahar port and about 100 hectares of land in the free zone will be allocated for investment by Afghanistan in the Chabahar area." Ismail Bagheri, spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, dismissed claims of transferring Iranian soil to Afghanistan as baseless and said, "It is entirely clear that transferring soil and land is not possible at all."
“It is entirely clear that transferring soil and land is not possible at all.”
The dispute centered on Chabahar Port’s geostrategic role as Iran’s only oceanic port outside the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, and on whether the arrangement was an investment lease model or something closer to a transfer of sovereignty. The controversy also reopened media attention to Iran’s water rights claim from Afghanistan, as the debate was framed alongside questions about the legal nature of any land allocation.
Foreign Ministry denies transfer
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said at his weekly press briefing that reports suggesting part of Iranian territory would be handed to Afghanistan had no factual basis and stemmed from a misinterpretation of remarks by an Iranian MP. Baghaei told audiences that the issue under discussion was helping landlocked countries gain access to ports and international waters as part of regional cooperation, and he stressed that Tehran had merely said it would examine the issue. Baghaei said, "no part of Iranian territory can be transferred to another country," and he added that all claims about transferring Iranian territory or sovereignty to Afghanistan were unfounded.
Mohsen Zangeneh’s initial remarks, delivered during a visit by an Iranian delegation to Kabul, said around 10 hectares of land at Chabahar port and more than 100 hectares in its free zone could be allocated for Afghan investment, and critics interpreted that as a transfer of territory. Zangeneh later walked back his initial remarks, saying no Iranian territory had been handed over to Afghanistan and describing the proposal as creating opportunities for Afghan investment and facilities such as a dry port.
Local concerns and transparency
In Iran, Mohsen Zangeneh’s explanation that 10 hectares at Chabahar Port and about 100 hectares in the free zone would be allocated for Afghan investment drew renewed criticism from Moein al-Din Saeidi, the representative of Chabahar in the 11th Parliament.
Saeidi argued that the enthusiasm around the proposal did not resolve concerns about whether allocations would be owned by the Afghan side or whether the issue was merely usufruct, and he said the procedures and types of allocations were not clearly defined.
Saeidi also said, "Mr. Zangeneh, in the interview he gave with such enthusiasm and zeal, presented this issue as good news for the people of Afghanistan and Iran, but we have a very bitter experience of Indian investment in Chabahar port".
Saeidi called for transparency by urging the governor of Sistan and Baluchestan, the CEO of the Free Zone, and provincial officials to explain whether the matter was being proposed and how it would be implemented.
Saeidi framed Chabahar’s capacity as vital under sanctions and blockade conditions, while warning that involving a foreign country through land transfer and ownership could provoke local sensitivities in Sistan and Baluchestan.