Saturday, April 11, 2026

Analysis: Why no power can undermine Iran's eternal dominance over the Strait of Hormuz

By Mohammad Molaei

The Strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway nestled between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, is not merely a geographical passageway or a shipping lane on the world map to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

It is a strategically vital waterway that forms the pulse of the global energy economy and, simultaneously, a potent asset for the Islamic Republic to fundamentally reshape the balance of power in the Persian Gulf and around the world.  

Iran seeks not merely to protect or monitor this strait but to exercise absolute, intelligent and legitimate control that, in the short term, applies economic pressure on any adversary to force it into retreat, negotiation, or acceptance of Iranian terms, and in the long term, to convert this control into permanent and inexhaustible strategic advantage.

This unchallenged authority on the strategic chokepoint, which carries around a quarter of global seaborne oil trade, includes regulating maritime traffic, collecting passage tolls, influencing global supply chains, and reconfiguring power dynamics in the region in alignment with the Axis of Resistance.

Backed by immutable geographical realities, international legal frameworks, precise economic data, and Iran's asymmetric military capabilities, we examine how no military threats nor diplomatic pressure can alter this fundamental and unalterable reality.

Geographically, the narrowest point of the Strait of Hormuz measures just 21 nautical miles — roughly 39 kilometers — in width. This extremely narrow gap places all key shipping routes, including two two-mile-wide carriageways and a two-mile buffer strip, entirely within Iranian and Omani exclusive territorial economic waters.

Iran is uniquely positioned to exert absolute control over the northern and most critical part of the strait, with its coastline stretching more than 1,600 kilometers along the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman. This extensive coastline includes not only mainland shores but also numerous strategic islands that serve as natural strongpoints.

Unlike the Suez Canal or Panama Canal — artificial waterways that can be circumnavigated — the Strait of Hormuz is the only natural, mandatory route for crude oil, liquefied natural gas, and chemical products exiting the Persian Gulf en route to the Indian Ocean and global markets.

No viable alternative to bypass Iran’s control

There is no economically viable or practically feasible alternative to bypass it.

The geography is also immutable: the mountains, rocky coasts, and shallow water depths in key formations make it impossible or prohibitively expensive to open parallel routes or construct new canals. No power on earth, irrespective of its military prowess, can overcome this geographical reality through insignificant actions, the occupation of tiny islands, or even the deployment of naval forces.

Iran's long and impenetrable coastline is a natural wall that would require manpower and logistical support far beyond the capacity of the world's largest armies to capture or hold.

Legally, the Strait of Hormuz falls under the purview of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), though its interpretation has consistently and appropriately followed the line advanced by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Because the strait's width is less than 24 nautical miles, the entire waterway is not considered part of international waters or an international shipping route. The governing legal regime is not free and compulsory transit passage, but rather innocent passage.

Iran, having signed but not fully ratified the 1982 Convention, has always maintained that vessel passage must not prejudice the sovereignty of coastal states in any way, and that any passage threatening Iran's national security is invalid.

This unique legal status grants Tehran the option of selective and conditional control over vessel traffic without necessarily infringing upon international law as interpreted by Western powers.

This is why the Strait of Hormuz is Iran's real unsinkable aircraft carrier: an inseparable asset that costs virtually nothing to maintain daily, yet offers strategic and deterrent value inestimable to the global economy.

This legal position, combined with its geographical reality, has placed Iran in a situation where it can exercise practical dominance and unquestionable authority over the waterway without maintaining a permanent surface force presence.

Economically, the Strait of Hormuz is rightly called the true chokepoint of the world economy.

According to the most recent data from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) and the International Energy Agency (IEA), approximately 20.9 million barrels of crude oil and petroleum products transit through the strait daily — equivalent to 20 percent of all oil consumed worldwide and 25 to 27 percent of global oil imports and exports.

Moreover, over 20 percent of global liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade — roughly 11.4 billion cubic feet per day, mostly from Qatari fields — also passes through this route.

Influence of the Strait of Hormuz beyond oil

But the waterway’s influence extends far beyond the oil industry. Iran is the world's largest source of urea — a nitrogen fertilizer vital to agriculture — and the broader Persian Gulf region dominates this trade.

Iran alone ranks among the top five urea exporters globally, and any disruption in transit automatically drives international urea prices up by 25 to 30 percent.

This price surge directly disrupts fertilizer supply chains for major importing countries such as India, Brazil, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and most African countries. The consequence is a large-scale food crisis: soaring wheat, rice, and other agricultural commodity prices, worldwide food inflation, and a direct threat to the food security of billions of people.

Thus, the Strait of Hormuz is the chokepoint of the global food supply — a weapon Iran can use to influence the currents of the global economy and generate unprecedented pressure by seizing control of food and energy chains without launching a single missile or drone.

For the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Strait of Hormuz serves as an asymmetric weapon or economic nuclear. It can hold the world economy at ransom by the implementation of selective but intelligent control of the waterway, without the requirement that involves direct war, without incurring huge costs of armaments and even the use of advanced nuclear weapons.

This strategy can be used to impose colossal and rapid economic strain that compels the opposing side to either flee in haste, bargain, or accept Iran's terms, with no other options.

The long-term goal could be to transform this temporary control into a structural and permanent arrangement: collecting passage tolls from vessels, selectively regulating traffic (free passage for friendly ships in the Persian Gulf, restrictions and bans on hostile ones), and completely redefining the rules of engagement in the Persian Gulf in alignment with the interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Axis of Resistance.

During periods of tension, Iran implements a calculated approach by raising the threat to the point of execution without necessarily ever closing the waterway completely, as was seen in operations True Promise 1, True Promise 2, and True Promise 3.  

This strategy imposes continuous economic costs on the enemy without inflicting any harm on Iran. Even though Iranian oil exports and its own products are indirectly affected in the short term, selective transit management and toll collection create new revenue streams, ultimately swinging the economic war in Tehran's favor.

Iran's balance of action closely mirrors that of Gamal Abdel Nasser when he nationalized the Suez Canal in 1956. Nasser dared to seize the canal, scuttled ships at its entrance, and effectively closed the oil lifeline to Europe.

That action brought the British and French empires to their knees, triggered the Suez Crisis, and symbolized the fall of British colonial rule in the West Asia region.

Just as Nasser, with a single strategic stroke, turned a major energy canal into an instrument of influence and power shift, Iran has now moved to nationalize the Strait of Hormuz through actual action, asymmetric military strength, and unyielding political determination.

This nationalization of the Strait of Hormuz can be seen as the beginning of the de facto demise of American power in the Persian Gulf region, just as the nationalization of Suez heralded the end of the British Empire. The only difference is that Iran employs less advanced, less costly, and more efficient means to enforce this power and authority.

Iran's efforts to implement a passage toll system in the operational and executive spheres have been intelligent and multifaceted. Enemies or vessels lacking the required permission face direct threats, while friendly vessels — particularly those from Eastern countries and key allies like China, Russia or Pakistan — pay tolls in Chinese yuan, Russian rubles, or cryptocurrencies such as USDT or Bitcoin, securing safe and uninterrupted passage.

This policy not only provides a direct and permanent revenue stream for the Iranian economy but also significantly reduces Iran's reliance on the US dollar, which is dying a slow death.

Through the comprehensive use of China's international payment system (CIPS), other banking networks, and digital payment systems, Tehran has successfully moved to eliminate the dollar from the commercial equations of the Strait of Hormuz and is working toward currency multipolarity and the dismantling of Western financial supremacy.

Iran’s legitimate control over Strait of Hormuz

This initiative is part of a broader economic warfare strategy that renders further struggle or pressure on Iran far more expensive and burdensome for the opponent than capitulating to Tehran's demands. Iran's intelligent and legitimate control over the Strait of Hormuz is thus absolute and enduring, resting on three unchangeable foundations.

First is the irrevocable nature of geography and the impossible cost of seizing it by force. Iran is literally impregnable with its 1,600-kilometer coastline. Any invading force attempting to assert control over a 100-kilometer front and fully reopen the strait would require over one million men, a vast naval fleet, and unparalleled logistical support — a force that even the world's strongest military would struggle to assemble.

Moreover, Iran's control over the strait does not depend on fixed ground positions surrounding the waterway; complete control can be exercised through anti-ship missiles, long-range drones with a range of nearly 2,000 kilometers, and integrated radar command systems.

The second justification is Iran's absolute superiority in both low-intensity and high-intensity asymmetric warfare. Large-scale mining of the Strait — not using surface ships but rather Fajr-5 rockets fired from a range of 70 kilometers — is entirely within Iran's capabilities.

These rockets can deploy magnetic, intelligent, and advanced mines along the entire length of the strait, rendering shipping traffic completely uneconomical. Clearing such mines from this waterway would require no less than six months, during which the global economy would be crippled in terms of energy supply and food security.

The ancillary cost of such warfare to Iran is minimal — thousands of dollars per mine — while the enemy suffers billions of dollars in daily losses, not to mention the devastating disruption to global supply chains.

The third foundation is Iran's long history and precise strategic calculus. Iran has on many occasions in the past spoken of shutting down the Strait but has not acted on it, as demonstrated during the crises of the 1980s, in 2011-2012, and the last few years.

The threat itself is an effective deterrent. Any force that attempts to respond to Iran's language of direct threat with its own language of direct threat instantly faces the prospect of a global energy shock, extreme inflation, economic downturn, and domestic opposition.

Records in the contemporary world have revealed that Iran will push the threat to the final stage of execution and will ultimately compel the opponent to withdraw and accept new realities, and it has been clearly and unquestionably demonstrated in the past 40 days.

Finally, Iran does not insist on a permanent and destructive closure of the Strait of Hormuz, but rather on intelligent and selective control. This domination includes non-dollar toll collection, selective passage management of vessels, and the transformation of all external threats into opportunities to reformulate the rules of engagement in the Persian Gulf.]

Iran soars above this waterway because its permanence — rooted in immutable natural geography, low-cost and effective asymmetric technology, and most importantly, its unshakable determination — has secured it forever.

This fact cannot be altered by any power on earth, regardless of massive military pressure or international coercion. Any attempt to counter Iran in the Strait of Hormuz would simply cost the global economy far more and ultimately force adversaries to accept the new reality in the Persian Gulf: this waterway will no longer be anyone's backyard, but rather the territory of the established, solid, and indestructible deterrent power of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Tehran negotiates in good faith, but distrust remains: Ghalibaf

By Al Mayadeen English

Iran’s Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf says Tehran is negotiating in good faith but does not trust the other side, as talks in Islamabad remain conditional on preconditions.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaking from Islamabad, affirmed that Tehran is negotiating in good faith but does not trust the other side, citing past experiences as unencouraging.

The Iranian delegation, headed by Parliament Speaker Ghalibaf,  arrived in Pakistan's capital, Islamabad, ahead of renewed ceasefire negotiations with the US, Fars News Agency reported early Friday.

Fars reports that Iran's delegation security, political, military, economic, and legal committees, noting that Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Ali Akbar Ahmadian, representative of Iran’s Leader in the Supreme National Security Council, are also accompanying Ghalibaf.

According to Fars, negotiations are contingent on Washington accepting Iran’s preconditions before formal discussions can begin, underscoring Tehran’s position that prior commitments must be addressed before advancing toward a ceasefire agreement.

Early Saturday morning, Ghalibaf posted a picture of himself aboard the plane carrying Tehran's negotiating delegation to Pakistan. The image showed pictures and bags belonging to the child martyrs of the Minab school massacre.

He captioned the post: "My companions on this trip."

Tehran: Good intentions, but no trust

Upon arrival at Islamabad airport, Ghalibaf reiterated that Tehran approaches negotiations with good intentions, but emphasized a lack of trust toward the opposing side.

"Our past experiences in negotiations have not been encouraging," he said, adding that "two wars were waged on Iran within one year, while it was in the middle of a negotiation process."

The agency reported that talks are expected to begin tomorrow afternoon at the Serena Hotel in Islamabad.

Tabatabaei: Diplomacy aligned with the field and the street

Iranian Presidential Assistant for Public Relations Mehdi Tabatabaei commented on the delegation’s departure, highlighting what he described as a growing alignment between diplomacy, the field, and public sentiment.

He stated that: "The armed forces have their hands on the trigger to punish the wrongdoers", adding that the "hearts of the people in the streets are beating with longing for victory."

Tabatabaei added that "the keen eyes of the men of diplomacy are waiting to seize victory for Iran."

Ceasefire tensions persist amid violations

The broader ceasefire framework remains fragile, particularly due to "Israel's" violating the ceasefire in its attacks on Lebanon

Ghalibaf has repeatedly emphasized that a ceasefire in Lebanon and the release of frozen Iranian assets are essential steps that must precede negotiations, while ongoing violations by the US and "Israel" continue to complicate diplomatic efforts.

"Israel" separated itself shortly after the announcement of the ceasefire, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office stating that Lebanon was not a part of the deal.  However, according to diplomatic sources speaking with CBS News, US President Donald Trump was informed that the ceasefire framework applied to the broader West Asia, and he reportedly agreed that this would include Lebanon.

The Israeli occupation launched a series of unprecedented attacks targeting civilian homes and infrastructure across Lebanon following the announcement. The aggression resulted in over 200 martyrs and thousands of injuries. 

A White House official also told CBS News that "Israel" agreed to the terms of the deal, further reinforcing the initial understanding that the ceasefire extended to Lebanon.

Despite the confirmations, the US position reportedly changed following a call between Trump and Netanyahu, raising questions surrounding the consistency and independence of US decision-making in the negotiation process. 

The sources also added that the abrupt shifts in Washington’s position, with what they described as a fragmented and inconsistent approach within the Iranian side, made diplomacy increasingly unstable and difficult to manage.

Netanyahu’s Likud Faces Poll Drop After War On Iran

By Al Ahed Staff, Agencies

Netanyahu’s Likud Faces Poll Drop After War On Iran

An opinion poll conducted after the announcement of the temporary US–Iran ceasefire indicated a sharp shift in the political landscape in the occupied territories, with a notable decline in support for “Israeli” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc.

According to the poll, Likud remains the largest parliamentary party, but lost three seats, dropping to 25, and consequently dropped Netanyahu's political camp down to 51 seats overall, reflecting its weakening position within the current electoral map.

In contrast, opposition parties gained ground, with Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar rising to 14 seats, Naftali Bennett steady at 19, and Yair Golan’s Democrats up to 11, while Yesh Atid led by Yair Lapid fell to 6 seats, its weakest recent showing.

Meanwhile, the poll also found Hadash–Ta’al and the United Arab List each winning 5 seats, while Balad fell below the electoral threshold. It added that a unified Arab list could secure 12 seats, further reducing Netanyahu’s bloc to 50 seats.

At the same time, the poll highlighted widespread dissatisfaction with the ceasefire, with 56% opposing it and favoring continued military action, while 58% said “Israel” and the US failed to achieve a decisive victory over Iran. Only 25% supported ending the war or believed it achieved deterrence goals.

Furthermore, the poll indicated a split between military and political trust, with 69% saying the Chief of Staff handled the operation effectively and 57% expressing confidence in the Mossad chief.

In contrast, political leaders fared poorly, as 52% rated War Minister Yisraeli Katz’s performance as poor and nearly half said Netanyahu failed to meet the demands of the situation.

Overall, the results point to a fragmented parliamentary landscape with no clear majority, as Netanyahu’s bloc declines while opposition parties gain ground, signaling deepening political instability.

Additionally, commentary in "Israeli" media also suggested the Iran war ended without a decisive outcome for “Israel” and the US, describing it as a strategic setback for their campaign.

Iran a Turning Point for Europe’s Liberation – from Donald Trump: Guardian Commentary

US President Donald Trump with the flag of the EU (image from archive).
A recent opinion article in The Guardian argues that the US-Israeli war on Iran marks a potential turning point in Europe’s relationship with Washington, particularly under President Donald Trump, as European states reassess their dependence on the United States and move toward greater strategic autonomy.

In the commentary, published by The Guardian’s Nathalie Tocci says that the US president’s “cry-wolf threats are losing their effect while European leaders are, at last, shifting from sycophancy to opposition.”

She describes European governments as being on what she calls “a journey” of emancipation from Washington, accelerated by successive geopolitical crises including the war in Ukraine, tensions over Greenland, and the conflict in the Middle East.

The author writes that “initially, most European politicians in power all but endorsed the illegal US and Israeli attack against Iran,” reflecting what she portrays as an early phase of alignment driven by transatlantic loyalty and hostility toward Tehran.

However, Tocci argues that this position has since shifted as the war escalated and its wider consequences became clearer, with European governments increasingly distancing themselves—quietly in some cases, more explicitly in others—from Washington’s approach.

The commentary highlights several examples of policy divergence, including Italy’s refusal to allow US warplanes access to a base in Sicily, France’s rejection of overflight rights and its opposition to a US-backed UN resolution on Iran, and Poland’s refusal to deploy air defence systems to the Middle East, citing threats from Russia.

Spain is presented as part of this broader shift, with Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez previously banning the use of jointly operated bases for operations linked to the war and later welcoming a conditional ceasefire while calling for “a lasting and just peace.”

Tocci argues that the conflict has also exposed wider strategic costs for Europe, including gains for Russia through higher oil revenues and pressure on Western military resources tied to support for Ukraine.

She adds that European leaders’ perception of Trump has changed significantly, writing that they have moved from seeing him as “daddy” to “baddie,” reflecting what she describes as a sharp decline in political deference toward Washington.

The commentary also notes that even far-right parties in Europe are beginning to distance themselves from Trump-aligned positions due to domestic political pressures.

Tocci concludes that Europe’s shifting posture could open the way for a more independent diplomatic role, reviving multilateral approaches to regional crises and potentially reshaping future negotiations on Iran’s nuclear file and wider Middle East security arrangements.

She adds that Europe’s evolving stance reflects not only normative commitments to multilateralism, but also “hard-nosed interests” as European governments reassess the costs of alignment with US-led military escalation.

Source: The Guardian (edited by Al-Manar)

Leader offers condolences on martyrdom of veteran diplomat Kamal Kharrazi

People start funeral procession for martyr Kamal Kharrazi at Imam Khomeini Mausoleum in Tehran after Friday prayers on April 10, 2026. (Photo by IQNA)
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei has offered condolences on the martyrdom of Kamal Kharrazi, head of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations and a former top diplomat, in a terrorist US-Israeli strike.

In a message on Friday, Ayatollah Khamenei offered condolences to the Iranian nation, the academic community and students of Kharrazi as well as his family on the martyrdom of the diplomat and his wife.

Ayatollah Khamenei hailed Kharrazi as "a distinguished professor in the field of science and culture and an experienced figure in the field of foreign policy”.

He added that Kharrazi’s martyrdom is a badge of honor for “the academic community, university professors, and political officials of Iran”, and at the same time is a "shameful testament to the villainy of the American-Zionist arrogant powers and the enemies of the science, culture, and civilization of Iran."

The Leader noted that Kharrazi “spent many years of his life” serving in various arenas, including culture and information, as well as at the Foreign Ministry.

Ayatollah Khamenei praised the activities of Kharrazi in the new fields of cognitive sciences as well as his role in the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations.

Kharrazi, the head of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations and a former foreign minister and an adviser to the Islamic Revolution Leader, attained martyrdom on Thursday night. He had been severely wounded in a US-Israeli terrorist attack targeting his Tehran residence on April 1, a strike that also claimed the life of his spouse.

His assassination occurred amid a widespread US-Israeli war of terrorism against the Islamic Republic that began on February 28. The invading coalition also assassinated Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, alongside other senior government officials and military commanders.

Earlier, Iran’s highest-ranking officials issued messages of condolence following the martyrdom of Kharrazi.

President Masoud Pezeshkian mourned the loss of a "prominent, committed, and influential figure" in the country's diplomatic apparatus, highlighting his decades of service following the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf strongly condemned the act of terrorism, describing it as the "cowardly assassination of the tireless soldier of diplomacy."

Qalibaf stated that the attack on the "committed scientist and self-sacrificing warrior" was a clear demonstration of the "baseness and weakness" of the US-Israeli coalition.

Highlighting Kharrazi's unwavering ideological loyalty, Judiciary Chief Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei noted that the late veteran diplomat was an "influential weight" across various political arenas.

Current Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also paid tribute to Kharrazi, saying he represented rationality, contemplation, and adherence to national interests.

The criminal US-Israeli aggression on Iran began on February 28 with airstrikes that assassinated senior Iranian officials and commanders.

Iranian armed forces responded by launching almost daily missile and drone operations targeting locations in the Israeli-occupied territories as well as US military bases and assets across the region.

On April 8, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) announced that there was an agreement to a Pakistan-brokered temporary ceasefire after the US accepted Iran’s 10-point proposal.

Friday, April 10, 2026

Ayatollah Khamenei: ‘Heroic People Are Victors’ In Third Imposed War

By Al Ahed Staff, Agencies

Ayatollah Khamenei: ‘Heroic People Are Victors’ In Third Imposed War

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Sayyed Mojtaba Khamenei has urged continued public mobilization against US and “Israeli” aggression, while praising the Iranian people’s “clear victory” in the ongoing imposed war.

In a message marking the 40th day since the Martyrdom of Leader of the Islamic Revolution Imam Sayyed Ali Khamenei, he addressed the ongoing imposed war and praised the Iranian people’s resilience.

The message opened with a Quranic verse, “Indeed, we have granted you a clear victory,” underscoring themes of perseverance and divine guidance.

In this context, the leader said, “Brothers and sisters in the homeland! Today… it can be boldly stated that you, the heroic people of Iran, have been the definitive victors in this arena,” adding that the Islamic Republic’s rise as a major power and the visible decline of imperialism have become evident to all.

Furthermore, he said, “This is undoubtedly a divine blessing,” attributing it to the “blood of our martyred leader and other bloodied martyrs” and public resilience, adding that it came through “their active participation in the streets, neighborhoods, mosques, and their selfless sacrifices.”

The message also referenced a February 28 strike during the first day of US–“Israeli” attacks on Iran, when a school in Minab was reportedly destroyed, causing martyrs among schoolgirls.

Additionally, Ayatollah Khamenei said the “practical expression of gratitude” is “tireless efforts towards achieving a powerful Iran,” stressing continued public engagement as outlined by the martyred leader. He added: “What is necessary at this time to achieve this strategic slogan and goal… is the continued presence of our dear people… This presence is a key pillar” of Iran’s current standing.

Moreover, Ayatollah Khamenei rejected the idea that negotiations could reduce public participation, urging continued mobilization, saying that “even if it is presumed that we have entered a phase of military silence,” citizens should “intensify their participation” in streets, neighborhoods, and mosques.

In addition, the Leader said public mobilization “in the streets” influences negotiations following the two-week ceasefire in the war, and reflected on the Islamic Republic’s development since its founding.

He stressed, “When our martyred leader took charge, the Islamic Republic was like a sapling… but after nearly 37 years… the noble tree he had nurtured stood strong, its roots deep.”

Similarly, the Leader said the path toward a stronger Iran depends on unity among diverse social groups, stating: “The path toward the goal of ‘a stronger Iran’ is through unity among the various sectors of society,” adding that in recent weeks “the hearts of the people have grown closer… and all have gathered under the flag of the homeland.”

Meanwhile, Ayatollah Khamenei touched on the swift, miraculous growth of the Iranian nation, saying any observer can grasp the rapid, almost miraculous growth of this nation.

In parallel, the Leader urged regional countries to “look properly and understand” what he called a “miracle” unfolding in the region, warning against reliance on “false promises” and stressing that closer relations depend on distancing from “arrogant powers.”

He said Iran would “not leave the criminals who attacked our country unpunished” and would seek compensation for damages and casualties, while also pledging to “take the management of the Strait of Hormuz to a new stage.”

At the same time, he added that Iran “does not seek war,” but will defend its rights and consider the wider Resistance Front in its decisions.

Calling for national unity amid wartime pressures, he urged citizens to support one another and warned against enemy media, saying it is essential to protect the mind from outlets “under the enemy’s control,” which “do not wish well for our country.”

Separately, the Leader described Imam Khamenei’s martyrdom as one of the “greatest crimes committed by the enemies of Islam and Iran” and among the heaviest national losses in modern history, urging the people to preserve what he called the “resolve for avenging the pure blood of our martyrs.”

He praised Khamenei as the “father of the Iranian nation,” framing the ongoing struggle as a “saga of heroic resistance” and calling for continued unity and resilience amid what he said had become a confrontation with “savage and armed” enemies.

Ultimately, the Leader compared the current struggle to past resilience, invoking the spirit of Ashura and the sacrifices of the Islamic Revolution, and said grief over Ayatollah Khamenei’s death has turned into renewed resistance across Iran.

He described Khamenei as a figure of “unparalleled dedication, resilience, and wisdom,” highlighting his focus on youth empowerment, scientific progress, and military development as foundations of Iran’s strength.

Ayatollah Khamenei noted that Khamenei’s influence has only grown after his martyrdom, with his “spirit lives on, guiding the Iranian people and the global movement for justice.”