While European countries are themselves grappling with a chain of economic and social crises, they traveled to Kyiv on the anniversary of Ukraine’s independence, ostensibly to take part in the celebrations; behind this display, however, there are clear signs of Ukraine’s continued dependence on the West.

Andrii Sybiha, Ukraine’s foreign minister, announced on Independence Day that a number of European officials and Western allies, including the British prime minister, the president of the European Council, the prime minister of Luxembourg, and the presidents of Moldova and Estonia, were in Kyiv, describing their support as part of Ukraine’s strength. The European Commission also announced the allocation of 6 billion euros to provide defense equipment to Ukraine. Meanwhile, the British prime minister made Kyiv the destination of his first foreign trip in the role and spoke of providing technical plans for Ukraine’s domestic production of long-range missiles.

Independence Surrendered at Critical Junctures

But this glittering picture conceals a more painful reality: a country that is supposed to be celebrating its Independence Day remains dependent on foreign backers for its security, weapons, and even decisions about the course of the war.

Ukraine declared independence on August 24, 1991, following the collapse of the Soviet Union; but over the following decades, instead of building indigenous pillars of power, it relinquished a significant part of its strategic capabilities in the hope of Western guarantees. Even Dmytro Kuleba, Ukraine’s former foreign minister, has acknowledged that giving up its nuclear weapons and the US failure to provide security guarantees were among Kyiv’s strategic mistakes.

In subsequent years, Western promises regarding Ukraine’s membership in the European Union and NATO never produced a definitive outcome. Political developments following the Orange Revolution and then the events of 2014 also showed the extent to which Ukraine’s domestic affairs had come under the influence of Western intervention and calculations; a process that ultimately led to a broad confrontation with Russia.

Independence Celebration or Extension of a War of Attrition?

Now, too, the presence of European officials in Kyiv conveys a message of dependence more than one of independence. Billions of euros in financial and military aid are being allocated to Ukraine while a significant portion of that money is effectively spent on purchasing weapons from Western defense industries; in other words, financial resources once again flow back into the economies and arms companies of the very countries that portray themselves as Ukraine’s supporters.

At the same time, Kyiv continues to face pressure to prolong the war and avoid compromise with Moscow. Under such circumstances, the fundamental question is this: if a country needs the green light from foreign powers to start, continue, or end its own war, where exactly does its independence lie?

Although Russia has, on the surface, taken control of parts of Ukrainian territory, the West also bears a major share of responsibility for the current situation through its extensive influence over Kyiv’s political, economic, and security structures; a situation that has resulted in the erosion of infrastructure, the weakening of the economy, widespread displacement, and the loss of parts of Ukraine’s territory.

Ukraine: A Lesson for the World; Iran: A Different Narrative

Ukraine’s fate is a strategic warning to the world: political independence without economic independence and indigenous defense capabilities is fragile and open to being traded away. A country that ties its security to the promises of others may sooner or later end up paying the price for the interests of powers whose decisions do not necessarily align with its national interests.

The fundamental difference between Iran and Ukraine becomes apparent at precisely this point. By relying on indigenous defense capabilities, geopolitical capacities, and maintaining its deterrent power, Iran has sought not to hand over decisions concerning its national security to foreign powers. Ukraine, by contrast, has relied on Western promises while reducing its strategic capabilities, leaving it in a position where it does not even have full control over the course of war and peace.

From this perspective, what is being held in Kyiv today under the name of “Independence Day” is less a picture of firmly established independence than a reflection of an independence that, at critical moments in history, has fallen under the shadow of dependence; an independence that remained on paper and, in the arena of politics, economics, and security, became a painful test of the price of trusting the promises of foreign powers.