Assembly of Experts: “There is No Path But Jihad and Resistance”; Threatening Trump and Netanyahu with Retaliation

In a new statement, the Assembly of Experts condemned negotiations and talk of “referendum” and “honorable peace” under current conditions, declaring that “there is no path but jihad and resistance.” The body also called on the judiciary to take action against individuals who express views opposing government policies and reaffirmed continued Islamic Republic support for Hezbollah Lebanon.

In a new statement, the Assembly of Experts reaffirmed its “jihad and resistance” policy, rejected negotiations with America, and called on the judiciary to take action against statements opposing the Islamic Republic’s declared policies. In another section of the statement, those responsible for and ordered the killing of Ali Khamenei were declared “deserving of death,” and retaliation against Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu was discussed. These positions are being raised as critics view the threatening language and restriction of the possibility of presenting views such as referendum and peace as indicators of intensified political and security atmosphere in Iran.

In this statement released yesterday, Tuesday, the 31st of Shahrivar 1405, corresponding to September 22, released by the Assembly of Experts stated that the experience of recent months has shown that against what it calls the “aggressive enemy,” there is no path but jihad and resistance, and no understanding can be reached with America and its allies.

One of the notable sections of the statement is the Assembly of Experts’ explicit response to raising topics such as referendum and peace. In this statement, “divisive, rash, uncoordinated, or opposing” statements to announced policies and specifically recent remarks about “referendum and honorable peace” are described as actions toward “surrender to the enemy” and “disturbing public opinion,” and referred to as “unforgivable crimes.”

The Assembly of Experts also called on responsible institutions, particularly the judiciary, to fulfill their legal duties against individuals it calls “division-sowers and rumor-mongers.”

This section of the statement in effect places the presentation of certain political views about the country’s future and how to end conflicts within a security framework; an issue that critics of the Islamic Republic view as a sign of the narrowing space for expressing different viewpoints.

In another section of the statement, the Assembly of Experts considers support for groups called the “Resistance Front” part of the Islamic Republic’s strategic policy and specifically emphasizes continued support for Hezbollah Lebanon and Ansarallah Yemen.

The statement stipulates that officials should not neglect support for Hezbollah and Ansarallah under any circumstances. This position shows that at least at the level of the Assembly of Experts, regional support for the Islamic Republic’s allies continues to be emphasized as part of the government’s official policy.

Another section of the statement addresses Iranians abroad. Without naming specific individuals, the Assembly of Experts called for judicial action against those who, according to this body, “have spent years serving the country’s enemies” and have insulted religious and national sanctities.

This section of the statement also raises concerns about the scope of judicial action against critics outside Iran, particularly where criteria such as “serving enemies” or “insulting sanctities” could encompass a wide range of behaviors and statements.

The most controversial section of this statement concerns Donald Trump, President of the United States, and Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel.

According to the published text, the Assembly of Experts declared those responsible for and ordered the killing of Ali Khamenei, the Islamic Republic’s former leader, as “deserving of death” and spoke of “retaliation.” Subsequently, Trump and Netanyahu were raised in the same context, and the statement declares that pursuing their punishment is rationally and religiously obligatory for those who have access to them.

This language was previously seen in a statement signed by dozens of Assembly of Experts members in Tir 1405. In that statement as well, Trump and Netanyahu were declared “deserving of death,” and those with access to them were called upon to kill them.

In examining this issue, a distinction must be made between the recent Assembly of Experts statement and the Tir statement signed by a group of members of this body.

In Tir, the Assembly of Experts secretariat announced that the publication of a statement titled “a group of Assembly of Experts members” did not align with the normal procedures of this body and its publication was outside normal practice.

However, the statement in question in this report was published under the title and content of the Assembly of Experts statement, and domestic media outlets republished its text. The Tasnim News Agency published the main sections of the statement and endorsed the experts’ emphasis on “jihad and resistance” and dealing with what this body calls “division-sowing.”

One of the important points of this statement is the duality it draws between resistance and surrender. In the experts’ text, discussing referendum or honorable peace under current conditions is presented not merely as a political disagreement, but as an action related to “surrender to the enemy” and “disturbing public opinion.”

From a political perspective, such language is significant; because it brings the boundary between political opposition, proposing a different path to end the conflict, and criminal action closer to one another.

Critics of the Islamic Republic have warned for years about the use of security and judicial titles against opponents and critics. In this statement as well, the request for judicial action against individuals who have simply expressed opinions on topics such as referendum or peace can be considered an example of this same approach.

Of course, determining whether a specific statement in a legal case actually constitutes a crime requires examination of the precise text of the statements, applicable laws, and legal proceedings, and conclusions cannot be drawn solely on the basis of this statement regarding the criminal liability of individuals.

The new Assembly of Experts statement shows that at the level of this body, the “resistance” policy continues to be preferred over negotiation and reconciliation. The experts, on one hand, opposed talk of referendum and “honorable peace” and called for judicial action against opponents of this approach, and on the other hand, reaffirmed continued support for Hezbollah Lebanon and other groups allied with the Islamic Republic.

Simultaneously, language related to declaring Trump and Netanyahu “deserving of death” and calling for retaliation is another aspect of the positions presented in this series of statements; positions that have gained widespread coverage due to direct reference to killing two foreign political figures.

What can be reported is that in its recent statement, the Assembly of Experts emphasized resistance, confrontation with America, continued support for regional allies, and judicial action against statements opposing official policy; while critics view such an approach as a sign of a narrowing political space and increased threatening language in the Islamic Republic.