Germany Summons Iranian Ambassador Over Plot to Attack Jewish Figures

Following the conviction of two men in Germany on charges of planning attacks against Jewish figures and espionage targeting objectives related to the Jewish community, Germany’s Foreign Ministry summoned the ambassador of the Islamic Republic. The Hamburg court announced that one of the defendants had been active in connection with Iran’s intelligence apparatus—a case that has heightened concerns about the security of Jews and activities attributed to the Iranian government in Europe.

Germany’s Foreign Ministry announced on Monday, October 19 (October 27 in the Iranian calendar), that it had summoned “Majid Nili Ahmadabadi,” the Islamic Republic’s ambassador to Berlin, following a court ruling against two men accused of preparing attacks against Jewish targets. This action came four days after Hamburg’s state superior court sentenced the two defendants to lengthy prison terms.

Germany’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement on the social media platform X, strongly condemning activities attributed to Iran and emphasizing that Berlin will not allow the free society of this country to be threatened. The ministry also stated that attacks on the lives of Jews or those who defend them are unacceptable in Germany, and attempts to target “Josef Schuster,” chairman of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, and “Volker Beck,” chairman of the German-Israeli Association, will face legal consequences.

According to reports from German media, the court on October 15, 2026 (September 23 in the Iranian calendar) sentenced a 54-year-old man identified as “Ali.S” to eight years and six months in prison. The second defendant, “Tawab.M,” was also sentenced to four years and six months in prison for his role in the plot.

The court judges concluded that the two men had planned attacks against targets related to the Jewish community in Germany. Based on the court’s findings, the intended targets included Josef Schuster and Volker Beck, as well as several kosher food stores in Berlin.

Published reports indicate that Ali.S had been tasked in early 2025 with gathering information about these two figures and monitoring their activities. The court also announced that his actions were connected to the direction of Iran’s intelligence agencies. According to German news network “Tagesschau,” the judge described the plot as being directed by Iran.

This case has been presented in Germany as a serious example of concerns about intelligence activities and violent plots attributed to the Islamic Republic on European soil. Germany’s Foreign Ministry has previously stated its support for placing the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and perpetrators behind Iran-attributed assassination attempts on the European Union’s list of terrorist organizations.

The case had already sparked political reactions before the verdict was issued. German authorities had expressed concern about the possibility of attempts to target Jewish figures and supporters of Israel. The defendants were transferred to Germany following their arrest in Denmark, and their trial proceedings continued at the Hamburg court.

It is important to distinguish between the judicial findings in this case and broader claims about the Islamic Republic’s policies. The court sentences reflect the judges’ assessment of the evidence presented in this particular case; however, any other claims regarding similar operations in different countries should be examined on the basis of independent evidence.

The summoning of the Islamic Republic’s ambassador indicates that the German government does not view this case merely as a domestic criminal matter, but also sees it within the framework of national security and the protection of the Jewish community. This action could affect relations between Tehran and Berlin and discussions within the European Union about how to deal with the Revolutionary Guards and intelligence activities attributed to Iran.

The primary concern for the German government is the protection of citizens and the prevention of political and regional disputes from becoming threats against individuals and communities within the country. On the other hand, any decision regarding sanctions or placing an entity on the European Union’s terrorist list requires the completion of related legal and political procedures.

The conviction of the two defendants and the summoning of Iran’s ambassador have once again raised the issue of states’ responsibility for activities attributed to their security institutions outside their borders. The question now is whether this case will lead to broader diplomatic and legal measures at the European level or will remain within the scope of current responses.