Araghchi: Iran does not buy its security

TEHRAN (Iran News) Iranian Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araghchi stated that “Iran does not buy its security, but builds it”, and added: We are not dependent on others to support us, but rather we defend ourselves by relying on domestic knowledge, power and capacities.

He also noted in an article: What is important for Iran is maintaining independence, strengthening domestic power and moving in a direction that stems from national interests.

The Iranian Foreign Minister recalled: History has shown that countries that have built their security on dependence on others have fallen victim to the changing priorities of their supporting powers at critical moments.

Araghchi also stated: Maintaining independence has a price that Iran has always paid for. Since the early days of the Islamic Revolution, economic pressures, sanctions, military threats, and proxy wars were all designed to turn Iran into a subordinate actor in the international system, but Iran, contrary to the predictions of its ill-wishers, stood firm.

The full text of this note, titled “Chaos in the White House; Dizziness in World Politics,” published in an Iranian newspaper, is as follows:

Politics is not a simple game. Sometimes, a formal meeting can reveal the realities hidden in the heart of power more than hundreds of diplomatic statements. The recent dispute in the White House between Donald Trump, J.D. Vance, and Volodymyr Zelensky was not just an ordinary disagreement; The incident exposed deep cracks that are widening in the heart of the international system. There is much speculation about the incident. Was the conflict deliberately planned? Or did it get out of hand? Was it intended to send domestic and foreign messages, or was it a sign of the failure of the coordination mechanisms in American foreign policy? What is certain is that the incident presented a picture of a chaotic world in which decisions are no longer made in a vacuum.

Crisis at the Heart of Western Power

For years, Washington has presented itself as the center of Western decision-making. But today, this center is no longer unchallenged. The dispute that took place in the heart of the White House is a symbol of strategic doubts, diplomatic uncertainties, and unresolved differences within the Western bloc. The Trump administration has entered the arena of global politics with the slogan of restoring “quick peace.” A promise that many considered overly optimistic has now become a double burden on the US president and his vice president. Trump and Vance face a real challenge: Will they be able to fulfill their commitments when the war involves the interests of many actors?

Ukraine: From Dependence to Defiance

One of the important messages of this dispute is the change in Ukraine’s position in the power equation. In the early days of the war, Zelensky relied more than ever on Western aid. But today, in the heart of the White House, he stands before the US president and gives a sharp response. It is a sign that even countries that have received support from Washington for years are no longer willing to be looked down upon. Whether as an independent actor or as a pawn on the chessboard of world powers, Ukraine has now shown that even small allies pay a price for maintaining their dignity and position.

Europe and the Shadow of New Divisions

Another big question is Europe’s response. Will the continent remain united in its support for Ukraine? Or will this dispute expose deeper divisions on the Western Front? France, Germany, and other European allies have taken a more cautious stance on the war in Ukraine from the start. Differences in defense and security policies have existed since the beginning. Now, with the verbal clash between the leaders of the White House and Zelensky, these differences have become more apparent. Europeans, who have been more cautious about developments in Eastern Europe from the start, are now faced with a new question: Does Washington still have the power and will to lead a united front in the West?

Moscow: Bystander or Designer?

This has been closely watched in Moscow. Russia has long believed that the Western alliance is fragile and tense. For the Kremlin, the recent spat in the White House is confirmation of the narrative that the other side is more unstable than it seems. But beyond that, Moscow is no longer just a passive bystander.

The war in Ukraine and recent developments have provided Russia with an opportunity to design its game more carefully on various fronts. On the one hand, Russia’s strategic partnership with China is expanding; on the other, the Kremlin is trying to change the international balance of power by strengthening its relations with developing countries. Increased economic engagement with the BRICS countries, expanding security cooperation with regional partners, and efforts to reduce dependence on the Western financial system are all indicators of Moscow’s approach to global developments.

Meanwhile, the dynamics of Russia-Europe relations have also changed. Some European countries, including Hungary and Slovakia, have taken a different stance from Moscow and are resisting Brussels’ anti-Russian policies. These differences could be a weak point in the cohesion of the Western Front that Russia will exploit.

When Domestic Politics Overshadows Diplomacy

One of the most important points that this dispute has revealed is the intense overlap between domestic and foreign policy in the United States. Trump and Vance, while having to deal with international challenges, are engaged in tense domestic politics. Elections, party rivalries, and domestic pressures have caused many major diplomatic decisions to be influenced by domestic equations rather than strategic interests.

This situation will be challenging not only for the United States but also for its allies, as the difficulty of predicting US foreign policy increases in such circumstances.

Iran; The Path of Wisdom and Prudence, the Conscious Choice of Independence

In this turbulent atmosphere, the Islamic Republic of Iran carefully and prudently examines developments. Turmoil in international politics is always detrimental to global stability and security. Unlike many actors who are involved in verbal tensions and hasty policies, Iran has always emphasized principles centered on independence, mutual respect, and avoiding unconstructive discourses.

However, Iran’s independence is not a coincidence or the result of imposed circumstances; rather, it has been a conscious choice, a strategic decision, and an unchangeable principle in the country’s foreign policy. Unlike some countries that have sought their security and stability through dependence on foreign powers, Iran has long understood that dependence will only lead to instability and loss of national sovereignty. Real security does not come from the support of extra-regional powers, but from domestic capability, reliance on national capacities, and reliance on the people. For this reason, Iran has chosen a different path; A path in which the fate of the country does not depend on the decisions of others, and policies are shaped based on national interests, not on foreign advice.

Maintaining independence has a price that Iran has always paid for. Since the early days of the Islamic Revolution, economic pressures, sanctions, military threats, and proxy wars have all been designed to turn Iran into a subordinate actor in the international system. But Iran, contrary to the predictions of its ill-wishers, has stood firm and shown that it will not only not give in to pressure, but will continue its path of development and progress by relying on its domestic capacities. This conscious choice has become a principle: Iran does not buy its security, it builds it. We do not depend on others to support us, but rather, we defend ourselves by relying on our domestic knowledge, power, and capacities.

History has shown that countries that have built their security on dependence on others have, at critical moments, fallen victim to the changing priorities of their supporting powers. Examples can be seen all over the world; governments that set their policies in the hope of security guarantees from great powers, but in the end, were left alone at critical junctures. But Iran has learned this historical lesson well. Independence is not just a slogan, but an inevitable necessity.
This view has caused Iran to be neither attached to foreign promises nor shaken by the threats of its enemies in its foreign policy.

While many international actors have tied their security to fragile and temporary knots, Iran has chosen a different path: a path based on reliance on domestic strength, independent progress, and resistance to external pressures. Iran does not need to derive its legitimacy from the approval of others, because its legitimacy comes from the will of the nation and independent policies.

Iran chose its own path years ago, a path in which neither conditional support from world powers, nor shaky diplomatic promises, nor external threats are the basis for decision-making. What is important for Iran is to maintain independence, strengthen domestic power, and move on a path that stems from national interests. In a world where powers are engaged in unstable disputes and competitions every day, Iran has shown with its stability in its policies that dependence on others is not only a danger, but also a strategic mistake.

This is the lesson that history has taught us time and again, and we have not only preserved it, but will also pass it on to future generations.