According to Atabe News, Seyed Ehsan Khandouzi, head of the Economic Studies Working Group of the Research Deputy Office of the Office of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, outlined the requirements for designing an anti-arrogance economic system. He said that resistance to arrogance is neither merely a slogan nor simply a negative stance; rather, it is a conscious effort to reclaim the right to make decisions and free nations from a situation in which their policies are shaped by the demands of dominant powers instead of national interests.

Khandouzi said the objective of economic domination goes beyond plundering resources. He explained that hegemonic powers seek to tie vital links in decision-making, production, and the settlement of transactions to themselves so tightly that nations cannot think, build, or resist without their permission. The aim is to institutionalize dependency and create oversight gaps, thereby weakening a nation's power from within.

He stressed that any action that undermines national capacity or creates dependencies, even when accompanied by anti-arrogance slogans, effectively plays into the hands of hegemonic powers. Economic national power means that the people and the state retain control over the engine of equitable development, while independent decision-making, stronger production, and oversight of financial, monetary, and commercial institutions are made possible.

The head of the Economic Studies Working Group added that dependency arises when the state cannot exercise its oversight, when a foreign actor can put the country's economy under pressure with a single decision, or when national resources become sources of discrimination and rent-seeking instead of strengthening production and people's livelihoods.

Distinguishing political positions from economic structures, he said resistance to arrogance must be reflected in the banking, trade, and foreign-exchange systems, as well as in resource allocation and the national budget. If these structures reproduce dependency, anti-arrogance slogans will lose their effect. He described the continued dependence of Muslim countries' trade settlements on institutions overseen by the US Treasury, alongside declarations of opposition to hegemony, as a structural contradiction.

Khandouzi explained economic dependency in three layers: hardware, software, and political economy. At the hardware level, production may take place domestically, but its continuation can depend on a component, technology, or strategic sector whose control lies outside the country.

Regarding the software layer, he said hegemonic powers shape consumer preferences even before selling their products. Through advertising, brands, and the promotion of consumerism and luxury-seeking, they embed their interests in people's lifestyles. At the political-economy level, there are also groups that benefit from keeping the country dependent.

He continued that the most complete form of dependency occurs when a nation sees independence as deprivation and dependency as progress. In such circumstances, the criteria for distinguishing right from wrong are reversed, and dependency is reproduced without people even realizing it. An anti-arrogance economic policy must address all three layers simultaneously.

Referring to mechanisms that strengthen domination from within the economy, Khandouzi said that reinforcing the front of hegemony does not necessarily require an overt action against national interests. Allowing a major financial institution to escape oversight, making the foreign-exchange system dependent on an external channel, or weakening domestic production under import pressure can also create leverage for the opposing side.

Emphasizing the need to reduce dependency in foreign-exchange settlements, he added that the country's currency settlements must not be tied to the will of a foreign government that itself makes decisions under US pressure. The issue, he said, is not necessarily betrayal, but rather the loss of effective state authority over critical points in the economy.

Khandouzi described coordination between foreign policy and the economic model as a feature of the intellectual framework of the martyred Leader (may God have mercy on him). He said that alongside his leading role in confronting arrogance and supporting liberation movements, the Leader supported an economic model centered on resistance and resilience, domestic and knowledge-based production, broad public participation, social justice, and an unequivocal fight against corruption.

He added that this model directed foreign relations toward neighboring, like-minded, Muslim countries and the Global South, rather than relying on redefining the economy within circles of dependency on the United States.

Khandouzi considered Iran's resilience in the face of sanctions, banking and trade restrictions, and imposed wars to be the result of implementing part of this intellectual framework. By contrast, he said, problems such as the depreciation of the national currency, the incomplete development of the North–South Corridor projects, and fluctuations in the use of the economic capacities of Eastern and emerging economies stem from the failure to consistently implement this approach across executive institutions.

At the end of his remarks, Khandouzi expressed hope that the unrealized dimensions of an anti-arrogance economy would be pursued with greater speed and determination. He stressed the need to move toward an economy whose institutional architecture, beyond declared positions, is aligned with the people's movement toward an independent Iran and resistance to global arrogance.