Farzad Soltani, researcher in French affairs
The Persian proverb "Kāfer hame rā be kīsh-e khod pendārad" — “The disbeliever judges everyone by his own creed”[1]— refers to the cognitive error of assuming that others behave or think as we do. A stingy person thinks others are stingy; a pessimist sees only negative motives in others’ actions. This saying highlights a tendency where people interpret others' behavior through the lens of their own character and worldview.
This bias is equally evident in international relations. The United States, a colonial power with a long history of using proxy forces to pursue its global ambitions, assumes that other nations act in the same way. Thus, when it sees Iran supporting Resistance forces in the region, it automatically labels them as proxies—because it has historically used proxies to extend its influence over other nations.
Proxy warfare and America’s view on international relations
Proxy warfare refers to situations where a major power, instead of engaging its enemies directly, supports other governments or groups to advance its interests. After World War II, the US has frequently used this method to confront its rivals —from backing rebel factions in Latin America and Africa to empowering extremist terrorists in the Middle East. All of this reflects a worldview in which others are seen as instruments to achieve American objectives.
But the core problem is that America views the world through the lens of “the Law of the Jungle” — believing all states operate the same way. This causes it to ignore the roles of faith, ideals, and the pursuit of independence in international relations. When Iran supports forces like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, or Ansar-Allah in Yemen, Washington assumes it is for political bargaining. But these forces are driven by deep religious convictions and anti-colonial ideals, not political opportunism.
America’s cognitive error in interpreting the Resistance Front
After recent regional developments, especially in Syria, Western media sought to promote the idea that Iran had lost its so-called proxies. In response, Imam Khamenei declared:
“In their various propaganda … they repeatedly say that the Islamic Republic has lost its proxies in the region. This is another completely false statement. The Islamic Republic doesn’t have proxy forces. Yemen fights due to its faith. Hezbollah fights because its powerful faith pulls it to the battlefield. Hamas and Islamic Jihad fight because their beliefs compel them to do so. They don’t act on our behalf. If we decide to take action one day, we don’t need proxy forces. Honorable, faithful men are present and will continue to be present in Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, and, God willing, in Syria soon. They are fighting against oppression and crime for their own sake.”
These statements make it clear: the Resistance Front is founded not on temporary political interests, but on shared faith and common ideals. Unlike the US, which sees allies as disposable tools for its colonial ambitions, Iran builds alliances based on Islamic values and resistance to arrogance and imperialism.
Perhaps the best answer to the West’s accusations about proxy forces lies in observing AnsarAllah’s defense of Gaza. Those who call Yemen a proxy of Iran, how do they explain Yemen’s defense of Gaza? Is Gaza, then, a proxy of Yemen? Or is Yemen a proxy of Gaza? For nearly a month, the people of Yemen have endured the most intense bombardments simply because they stood in defense of Palestine. Yet they persist, unwavering in their boycott of the criminal Zionist regime. What nation in the world would willingly endure such pressure merely on orders from another country or group? Which American ally would tolerate such aggression just to protect US interests? The answer is obvious, but only if we remove the colonialist lens and instead view these actions through the eyes of faith and resistance.
Two views on alliances: Material gain vs. moral commitment
One of the starkest differences between the Resistance Front and the Western bloc lies in their perception of alliance:
The Western View: Alliances are temporary contracts, easily revoked when interests shift. One need only look at how the US treated terrorist groups like ISIS — initially supporting them, then abandoning or attacking them once their usefulness ended. The US has repeatedly acted opportunistically even with its closest allies: imposing sanctions on Turkey for buying Russia’s S-400 system, or pressuring Saudi Arabia when oil dependencies declined. Tariffs against longtime allies like Canada, Australia, and Japan — countries that have militarily supported US interests for decades — illustrate how Washington will undermine even traditional partners just to cover its trillions in debt. This approach has eroded trust, even among America’s closest allies, who now question whether US support will endure through changing political winds.
The Resistance View: Alliances are ethical and religious obligations. Iran has consistently supported oppressed nations like Palestine and Yemen — even during its most difficult times. For the Resistance Front, alliance is not a political transaction; it is a moral and religious duty. This is why, even under severe sanctions and military threats, Iran has never abandoned its allies.
This worldview is evident in numerous examples:
- Unwavering Support for Palestine: Despite international pressure over issues like human rights or Iran’s nuclear file, Iran has never lessened its support for Palestine and its resistance forces.
- Support for Bosnian Muslims: During the Bosnian War (1992–1995), Iran provided extensive political, economic, and military support to Bosnian Muslims.
- Backing the Afghan Mujahideen: Immediately after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1990s, Iran supported the Afghan resistance—despite being embroiled in its own war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
- Standing with Syria Against Terrorism: While the West supported terrorist groups, Iran and Hezbollah stood firmly by the Syrian government. In return, the West imposed sanctions on Iran, using the nuclear file as a pretext.
This fundamental difference in worldview has made it impossible for the US to understand why Resistance Forces, despite immense military and economic pressure, remain resilient. Washington underestimates the power of faith and shared ideals.
In short, some alliances are not built on profit, but on belief — rooted in resistance to oppression, independence, and a shared moral vision. America's strategy of economic sanctions and pressure campaigns has failed to sever these bonds because it fundamentally misreads the nature of these relationships.
Why the US Misjudges the Resistance Front
Because of its utilitarian view of international relations, the US has never understood the essence of the Resistance Front. It assumes all nations act as it does: Selfishly and transactionally. And this has led to grave strategic miscalculations. But the truth is, the Resistance movement in the region did not arise from Tehran’s orders. It grew out of faith, the quest for sovereignty, and opposition to injustice.
Ultimately, the Resistance Front is based on enduring principles and values, while the West is concerned only with temporary power equations. This is why the Resistance not only endures, but grows stronger each day. America and its allies must realize that the faith and willpower of nations are stronger than any weapon or sanction.
The Persian proverb "The disbeliever judges everyone by his own creed" aptly explains why America continually fails to grasp the spirit of Resistance. It sees the world only through the prism of military and economic power — while the nations of the Resistance march forward with iron resolve, driven by faith. A march that no force can extinguish.
(The views expressed in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Khamenei.ir.)
[1] This proverb has a parallel proverb in English which says, “Every mad man thinks all other men mad.”
