In the midst of one of the most intense waves of internal unrest Iran has seen in decades, a senior Iranian cleric has publicly called for the execution of protesters detained during the protests a demand that comes amid a brutal government crackdown, rising international concern and ongoing geopolitical tensions. The remarks underscore not only the internal divisions within Iran but also the heightened risks of further violence in a country already facing widespread discontent and global scrutiny.
A Cleric’s Fiery Sermon During Nationwide Unrest
Ayatollah Ahmad Khatami, a powerful hard-line cleric appointed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and a member of both the Assembly of Experts and the Guardian Council, delivered a sermon that was broadcast across Iranian state radio and television. In that address, he demanded the death penalty for protesters detained in connection with the nationwide protests that erupted on Dec. 28, 2025 and have continued into 2026.
Khatami’s speech was not merely a call for harsher punishment; it reflected the deep anger among certain segments of the Iranian establishment toward demonstrators. During the sermon, worshippers at the mosque responded with chants of “Armed hypocrites should be put to death!”, a slogan that illustrated how sectarian rhetoric and state framing have influenced public sentiment.
Official Claims of Damage From Protests
In addition to his call for executions, Khatami made sweeping claims about the extent of damage resulting from the protests — numbers that were presented as an official tally at a time when the Iranian government has tightly controlled information. According to his figures:
-
350 mosques and 126 prayer halls, along with about 20 other holy sites, were damaged.
-
400 hospitals were reportedly damaged.
-
Emergency services including 106 ambulances, 71 fire department vehicles and 50 other emergency response vehicles had also been affected.
-
80 homes of Friday prayer leaders individuals who occupy influential religious positions within the state were among the properties reportedly targeted.
These statistics, while cited by Iranian authorities, have not been independently verified by international observers or independent agencies. In many cases, state media and officials have presented information that supports the government’s narrative framing of the protests as violent and influenced by foreign forces.
Labeling Protesters as Foreign Agents
Throughout his sermon, Khatami repeatedly reiterated longstanding accusations by Iranian leadership that the protesters are not genuine domestic dissenters but are instead acting on behalf of external adversaries. He described demonstrators as “Trump’s soldiers” and the “butlers” of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, asserting that their actions threatened the very fabric of the Islamic Republic.
In his speech, Khatami warned that both Netanyahu and former U.S. President Donald Trump should expect “hard revenge from the system,” saying that “Americans and Zionists should not expect peace.” These kinds of statements reflect a mixture of ideological rhetoric and geopolitical antagonism that remains central to Iran’s hard-line establishment.
Broader Context: A Crackdown and a Geopolitical Flashpoint
The protests were initially sparked by economic hardship, growing poverty and political frustration a combination that rapidly evolved into broader anti-regime demonstrations across many cities and provinces. Human rights groups and independent monitors estimate that several thousand people have been killed so far in the government’s violent response to these protests, and that thousands more have been detained.
Iran’s government responded to the unrest by implementing a nationwide internet blackout around Jan. 8, 2026, severely limiting independent reporting and outside communication. This has made it difficult to confirm casualty figures, and has cut domestic populations off from outside access.
Internationally, these developments have turned Iran into a geopolitical flashpoint. Former U.S. President Trump had threatened that the United States was “locked and loaded” and ready to intervene if Iranian authorities used violence against unarmed demonstrators. Though Trump later suggested that supposed executions had been canceled, Tehran’s foreign minister disputed those claims and said “there is no plan for hanging,” offering a diplomatic counter-narrative to U.S. warnings.
Contrasting Official Lines and Human Rights Concerns
While Iranian state officials portray their crackdown as law enforcement against “violent elements” and “foreign agents,” human rights organizations have described the situation as one of the most severe crackdowns in Iran in decades, with reports of live ammunition used against largely unarmed crowds. Many observers see the cleric’s demand for executions as part of a broader strategy aimed at intimidation and suppressing opposition.
Adding to the concern, Iran’s judiciary has separately indicated that it plans to pursue rapid trials and punishments for those detained, raising the specter of swift and severe penalties for protesters. This aligns with other statements from the Iranian justice system urging that detention cases be resolved quickly, possibly circumventing due process.
The International Reaction and Internal Pressure
Globally, Iran’s actions have drawn widespread criticism. Governments, human rights groups, and international bodies have condemned the crackdown, with many urging the Iranian government to respect human rights and pursue peaceful solutions to political grievances. The United Nations and various foreign ministries have issued statements calling for restraint and accountability. Meanwhile, allies and adversaries alike have weighed in with some urging dialogue and others using the situation to criticize Tehran’s broader policies.
Domestically, many Iranians have expressed anger and frustration, not only toward the regime’s handling of the protests but also at perceived inconsistencies in international responses particularly U.S. rhetoric that initially pledged strong support but later appeared to back away from immediate intervention. Some citizens and activists have described the situation as a “betrayal” by foreign governments whom they hoped would take more decisive action.
Conclusion: A Turning Point With Uncertain Outcomes
As Iran stands at this critical juncture, tensions remain high. The cleric’s call for executions adds a chilling dimension to an already fraught landscape where political dissent, state repression, and international antagonism intertwine. Whether this escalation will deepen internal divisions, encourage increased international pressure, or lead to further instability remains uncertain but the events of early 2026 in Iran are already shaping up to be a defining chapter in the country’s modern history