Democracy threatened: US's greed for an interest in other countries

News ID: ۳۸۶۲۳۴

شنبه - ۲۲ اسفند ۲۰۲۵ / 2025 22 December

In an interview with Khamenei.ir, Dr. Foad Izadi, an associate professor of American Studies at the University of Tehran, examines the nature of the political-economic behavior and relations of the United States with other countries.

Question: In a recent meeting, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution pointed out that the United States expects other nations to consider American interests and profits in their governance and policymaking. Could you provide specific examples that illustrate this assertion made by the Leader?

F. Izadi: In my opinion, the first point that can be made here is that officials in each country have a duty to act in accordance with their national interests. Countries that have democracy bear an additional responsibility because a burden has been placed on these officials by the people of that country. In countries where there is no democracy, such as monarchies or various forms of dictatorships, they also have a duty to work in the interest of their national interests. However, they may not have that additional burden to the same extent, given that these governments often lack popular support.

Question: What is the root of this American nature and spirit that constantly demands a piece of the pie from other countries in various fields?

F. Izadi: It's a reality in the United States that American officials, like those in other countries, are obligated to work in the best interests of their nation.  One of the tasks that both US officials and those from other countries undertake is that when they are engaged in talks and diplomatic activities with other countries, they closely observe and assess how they can increase their country's power and influence. They look for ways to leverage opportunities present in other countries to further their own national interests.

The third point regarding the US is that, unfortunately, over the past decades and perhaps since the very founding of the United States, there has been a characteristic of America that many other countries do not possess, and that is greed. In other words, we have a common approach to safeguarding the national interests of our countries, which happens to be the responsibility of national officials. However, what America does is turn this into a tool for exploitation. In other words, the American individual steps out of the realm of normalcy and balance and begins to use force, various tools of power — which they themselves refer to this as “coercive diplomacy.” They use various tools that fall under this coercive diplomacy to gain more benefits for America.

This goes back to their imperialistic spirit that they themselves call it “American Exceptionalism.” American Exceptionalism means that the United States, or US officials, perhaps some of their citizens, believe that because America is a great country — for example, it has a special culture, civilization, status, or a higher power — these conditions make it an exceptional country. Under this American Exceptionalism, which has itself become a doctrine and ideology, US officials grant themselves the right to act contrary to international norms and to achieve their goals using unconventional and generally illegal means.

You don't need to be a country that the Americans consider an enemy. They have the same attitude toward their allies as well. Right now, Trump has been the topic of discussion over the past few days. He’s already started this, announcing that Canada, which is a member of the United Nations and an independent country with its own government structure, should become a state within America. He keeps repeating this, warning that if it doesn't happen, he will use certain economic tools for example, to penalize Canada.

There is a famous quote by Henry Kissinger that says, “It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal.” Even though Henry Kissinger has passed away, this statement rings true for Canada and many of America's other allies. So, this excessive greed isn't just a problem for countries that are enemies or have conflicts with the United States; it's a problem for all countries. This is because of the Americans' exceptionalist and arrogant attitude. They feel entitled to everything and believe they can use various tools to achieve their goals.

Question: The Leader of the Islamic Revolution looked at this matter from another perspective, which is that the compliance of a country's officials with US demands and interests comes at a cost: the jeopardizing of democracy.

F. Izadi: What happens to democracy in countries that are under pressure from the United States? I mean, what happens if the officials of a target country comply with American demands, prioritizing US interests over their own nation's? This is a choice. And it’s a bad choice. If the country in question is democratic, this goes against the will of the people who elected these officials. Even if it's not a democracy, it still doesn't justify the government officials prioritizing US interests. This is a problem that we have been witnessing worldwide for decades, especially after World War II. Before World War II, back in the 19th century, the increasing influence of the United States in Latin America led to challenges that affected the people of those countries more significantly than those in other regions.

And, in practice, what happens is that either the officials of this country comply with US demands, deviating from their normal role of serving their own people to instead serve America. Or they do not comply, and both the officials and the people of that country face pressure from the US, which tries to deal with them using the tools at its disposal.

We have numerous historical examples of this. First, there's our own country, as mentioned by our Leader. Before the Revolution, the US considered the shah [Mohammad Reza Pahlavi] to be its servant. This sense of servitude was heightened because the Americans had installed the shah through a coup, giving them a special feeling of entitlement. They had higher expectations of the shah, and he, in turn, served them. Iran was the number one purchaser of weapons in the years leading up to the Revolution. No country bought as many weapons from the Americans as Iran did, and Iran accounted for one-third of all global arms sales from the US. This was also a directive given by the Americans. Instead of giving the shah money, they told him they would provide him with weapons, part of which were never even delivered. This was the situation in Iran. And even today, there is no end in sight to this story.

In recent years, when the Americans perceived opportunities within certain Iranian administrations, they focused on a number of issues that happen to be Iran's power levers. Their aim is to deprive Iran of these very levers. For this reason, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution's word of caution today serves as a reminder to those who have ascended to power under the banner of democracy. It underscores that they have attained their positions in order to serve the interests of the Iranian people, rather than to cater to the demands of US officials who seek to exert pressure on them through various means.

If someone in Iran were to prioritize US interests over their own country's interests, then that person would create problems for themselves and for the country. We see this issue in other parts of the world as well. Even if a country is a friend of the United States, they are forced to comply with the US, much like the countries that are members of NATO.

These countries are considered as allies of the United States. In recent years, both the Trump and Biden administrations, among others, have exerted pressure on NATO countries, insisting that, for example, a certain percentage of their annual budget should be spent on military expenditures and that they should purchase weapons that are available in the world, which are mostly US-made and can be used by NATO members. So, essentially, the Americans were telling NATO members to buy weapons. However, instead of explicitly instructing them to "buy weapons," they told them that as NATO members, you need to hand over, for example, 2% or 5% of your total national budget to us.

So, that’s what the situation is like with regards to the countries that are America’s friends. I already spoke about Canada — they want the entire country. The island of Greenland belongs to Denmark, which has been an ally of the United States for many years. Now the Trump administration has stated that they might use military force to seize and occupy Greenland. Also, concerning Panama, the individuals currently in Panama are those who have allied with the US and some of them came to power with American support. However, in this matter as well, Trump claims that the Panama Canal belongs to the United States and that Panama should give it to them. This goes beyond just Trump; similar policies had existed in previous administrations as well.

That’s why there was this important point in the remarks of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution that if a country claims to have democracy, it cannot simply comply with the demands of a certain individual in the executive or legislative branches of the United States without taking into account the interests of its own people. There are more than 30 countries worldwide that have been officially sanctioned by the US Congress. Why were they sanctioned? Because they did not heed the requests of US officials and, hence, Congress passed legislation imposing sanctions against them. This is the situation that the world is currently facing.

(The views expressed in this interview are interviewee’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Khamenei.ir.)