In a striking address marking Nowruz, the Persian New Year, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei called upon Iranian media to temper their focus on national vulnerabilities amidst ongoing global tensions. This directive, delivered in a statement on Friday, also contained serious accusations against Israel, alleging that the nation was behind “false flag” attacks in Turkey and Oman. Khamenei, whose public appearances have been scarce since a reported injury in a strike that claimed his father’s life, used this occasion to imbue the new year with a theme of “Resistance Economy under National Unity and National Security,” while also paying homage to the regime’s “martyrs.” The release of his written statement earlier in March had fueled speculation about his health, with even powerful figures like United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth suggesting Khamenei might be “wounded and likely disfigured.” This backdrop of personal uncertainty and geopolitical turmoil framed his significant New Year’s message.
Khamenei’s statement took a firm stance on recent regional incidents, vehemently denying any Iranian involvement in the alleged “false flag” attacks in Turkey and Oman. He stressed the purportedly “good relations” Iran maintains with both countries, presenting the attacks as a calculated maneuver by a “Zionist enemy.” He claimed this was a tactic designed to sow discord between the Islamic Republic and its neighbors, hinting that similar ploys could unfold in other nations. Beyond these immediate accusations, the Supreme Leader outlined three “military and security wars” that he asserted had been imposed upon Iran, painting a picture of a nation under consistent external pressure. His narrative served to galvanize national sentiment and deflect blame from Iran for regional instability.
The first “war” referred to by Khamenei was the June 2025 Israel-Iran conflict, a period he portrayed as extremely costly for Iran, resulting in the loss of “some of the country’s best commanders and prominent scientists.” He further alleged that the United States had actively aided Israel during this conflict, even “in the midst of negotiations,” suggesting a betrayal of diplomatic efforts. He claimed that Israel had initially believed the Iranian populace would overthrow the regime in the war’s early days. However, according to Khamenei, this expectation proved false. He asserted that the collective efforts of the Iranian people and the “unparalleled bravery of Islam’s fighters” not only prevented such an outcome but also forced Israel to seek a cessation of hostilities through mediation, effectively rescuing itself “from the edge of the abyss.” This narrative aimed to bolster national pride and highlight the resilience of the Iranian state and its citizens.
Shifting to internal challenges, the second “war” detailed in Khamenei’s statement addressed the Iranian anti-regime protests that erupted in late December. He branded these protests as “the January Coup,” a term that downplays their organic origins and frames them as an attempted overthrow of the government. The official response to these demonstrations was anything but restrained; they faced brutal and deadly crackdowns throughout the following month. While Khamenei’s statement acknowledged this period of unrest, it conspicuously omitted the human cost. Independent estimates, however, suggest that the Iranian government was responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of protesters across the country. This stark discrepancy between the official narrative and external reports underscores the regime’s approach to internal dissent and its tight control over information.
Finally, Khamenei identified the “ongoing war” waged by Israel and the US against Iran as the third major conflict. This framing presents Iran as a victim of continuous aggression from two powerful adversaries. By grouping these diverse events—from specific military confrontations and alleged intelligence operations to internal protests—under the umbrella of “imposed wars,” Khamenei constructs a cohesive narrative of external threat and internal unity. This rhetoric serves multiple purposes: it justifies the regime’s actions, mobilizes public support for its policies, and reinforces the idea of a perpetually beleaguered nation requiring steadfast loyalty from its citizens. The ongoing nature of this perceived third war suggests a long-term struggle, demanding constant vigilance and sacrifice from the Iranian people as they navigate a complex and often hostile geopolitical landscape.