The instrumentalization of religion in warfare is not alien to human history; the present conflict is no exception. When Benjamin Netanyahu initiated the war on 28th February, he invoked the festival of Purim. Jews celebrate this day annually with rejoicing; that year, it fell on the 2 nd and 3rd of March. According to Jewish historical memory, approximately 2,500 years ago, a plot was devised in ancient Iran to massacre the Jews. This conspiracy was orchestrated by Haman, a minister of the king. The Jewish Queen Esther and her uncle Mordecai together thwarted this scheme. By linking the contemporary conflict with Iran to this historical narrative, Netanyahu imbued the war with a distinctly religious coloration. Netanyahu further likened Iran and Hamas to Amalek—a deeply religious reference. Amalek was the nation that attacked the Israelites after their exodus from Egypt, and conflict between the two endured for a long time. According to the First Book of Samuel in the Old Testament, the Israelites were commanded to utterly annihilate them. God is reported to have instructed King Saul: “Thus says the Lord of Hosts: I remember what Amalek did to Israel… Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and donkey” (15:2-3). Thus, in Netanyahu’s framing, the killing of Iranians and Hamas becomes a religious obligation. Under the leadership of Donald Trump, the United States has likewise not lagged behind in employing religion. On 5 March, Christian leaders affiliated with a particular group gathered in the Oval Office and prayed for President Trump—that God might shelter him and grant him victory. The U.S. Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, openly regards this war as religious in nature, even to the extent of inscribing tattoos on his body—an act suggestive of religious zealotry. Moreover, according to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, over 110 complaints were received from American soldiers stationed in the Middle East, alleging that senior officers had told them they were fighting a divine war. In this narrative, President Trump is believed to have been commissioned by Christ to declare war against Iran and to prepare the ground for Armageddon, thereby ushering in the Second Coming. Armageddon, in this conception, is the final cosmic battle between truth and falsehood, culminating in the triumph of righteousness. It is to be fought under the leadership of Christ on the land of Palestine, with catastrophic human loss—billions perishing and the land inundated with blood. Iran, too, wages this war with a religious ethos. Twelver Shi‘a Muslims await their twelfth Imam, Imam Mahdi, who is believed to appear near the end of times. Prior to his advent, the world will be filled with mischief; thereafter, under his leadership, justice will prevail globally. From this perspective, current events are seen as paving the way for that final transformation. The Iranian state has effectively fused national identity with the waiting of the Mahdi. In this regard, the Iranian people appear unified in perceiving their struggle as religious— not only in the present conflict, but in previous wars as well, such as that against Saddam Hussein. Thus, all parties, to varying degrees, are casting this conflict in religious terms. Within all three Abrahamic traditions exists the concept of a messianic figure who will appear at the end of worldly history and establish the kingdom of God. Each community awaits such a figure and interprets its struggles through this lens. Yet, none possesses a definitive program regarding the timing of this arrival. While signs are enumerated, no specific date can be determined. Nor is there consensus regarding the nature of this figure. For instance, the concept of Imam Mahdi exists among both Sunnis and Shi‘a, yet the two traditions differ significantly: Shi‘a doctrine holds that he has already been born and is in occultation, whereas Sunnis maintain that he will be born closer to the end times.
Similarly, the conception of Mahdi articulated by Abul Ala Maududi differs from both Sunni and Shia scholarly views. Despite these divergences, there is broad agreement that a great final confrontation between truth and falsehood will precede the Day of Judgment. This represents the position of the majority within these religious traditions, though it does not amount to a universally binding creed; significant difference of opinion persists in its details. For example, a segment within Christianity known as “Christian Zionists” interprets this conflict as Armageddon, whereas Catholics oppose this view. When the U.S. Secretary of Defense sought to portray the war with Iran in religious terms, Pope Leo, the foremost leader of the Christian world, courageously rejected this claim, declaring the war among Iran, the United States, and Israel to be unjust, and warning against invoking the name of Christ to justify it. He cited a biblical principle: those who impose war and whose hands are stained with blood are not heard by God; rather, they are rejected. Likewise, among Muslim intellectuals, figures such as Ibn Khaldun and Allama Iqbal have regarded the concept of a messianic advent as alien to the essential foundation of Islamic thought. Throughout Muslim history, many individuals have claimed to be the Mahdi, yet the broader Muslim community has not accepted such claims. It appears, however, that humanity at large is not inclined to designate this conflict as religious. The majority critiques President Trump and regards him as culpable—not on religious grounds, but on the basis of universal morality and rationality. Similarly, there exists near-consensus regarding Israeli excesses, again grounded in non- religious ethical reasoning. Within the Muslim world, sectarian differences between Sunni and Shi‘a impedes the framing of this war as religious. In practical terms, the Muslim world remains largely disengaged, while ethnic and regional prejudices continue to shape perceptions of the conflict. The Quran has foretold that the Jews will remain under the dominance of the followers of Christ until the Day of Judgment. This conflict has once again borne out that prediction: the world has witnessed that without American backing, Israel’s existence could be erased—if not by others, then by Iran alone. Nevertheless, should they desist from disobedience and turn in repentance, the mercy of God remains open to them as well.