He called on God to “break the teeth” and kill the “wicked” enemies “who deserve no mercy” and should be “delivered to the eternal damnation prepared for them”. In other words, for Hegseth, this is a holy war in which he calls on God to “grant this task force clear and righteous targets for violence”.

This war is not primarily about religion, but leaders on all sides have used religion to justify their actions.

Not for decades have political leaders of all three major Abrahamic faith traditions invoked parts of their respective traditions to legitimize war in this way. The way faith and religious scripture and doctrine have been used by the US and Israel to justify launching their war in Iran is a worrying development, and one that highlights the growing relationship between religion and authoritarian nationalism.

It has also deepened the animosity with Iran, where politicians and religious leaders have themselves invoked religious and messianic narratives. But Iran is an Islamic republic in which religion has a significant constitutional role.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu used religious imagery while announcing the start of the war on Feb. 28. He invoked the Jewish holiday of Purim, which fell on March 2-3 this year and which celebrates the Jewish escape from a plot by Haman, an evil Persian official, to annihilate the Jews in the ancient Persian Empire.

“My brothers and sisters, in two days we will celebrate the holiday of Purim. Two thousand five hundred years ago in ancient Persia, an enemy rose against us with the exact same goal of completely destroying our people. But Mordechai the Jew and Queen Esther, with their courage and resourcefulness, saved our people. In those days of Purim, the lot was cast, and the wicked Haman fell along with it. Even today on the holiday of Purim, the lot was cast, and the end of the evil regime will also come,” he said.

Netanyahu has also compared Iran to the biblical Amalekites (a theme he has used to refer to Hamas in Gaza, drawing criticism from the United Nations). The Amalekites were archenemies of the Jewish people whom the Old Testament God ordered to be completely destroyed, “men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys”. Netanyahu’s government rests on an alliance with religious Zionists, who frequently invoke religious references to justify Israel’s policies.

The first amendment of the US constitution meanwhile guarantees freedom of religion and effectively prevents one faith being favored over any others. That said, around 70 percent of Americans identify with a religious faith (the vast majority are Christians), and there is evidence of the growing influence of evangelical Christianity on the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement and the Donald Trump administration.

On March 5, the US president was joined for prayers in the Oval Office by a group of evangelical pastors. Placing their hands on him, they prayed, “for your grace and protection over him … and over our troops”. The video of the American president engaging in a group prayer while engaged in a major war went viral.

At the start of the war, hundreds of US troops reported being told by their commanders that the war was “part of God’s divine plan”, and that “President Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth.”

Evangelical movements have vastly increased their political influence in the US and across the world. They often support right-wing politicians domestically and Israel internationally, believing in Christian Zionism or that the strengthening of the state of Israel will ultimately lead to the erection of the Temple in Jerusalem and hasten the arrival of the day of judgement.

Challenged by evangelical movements, the Catholic Church, in contrast, has condemned the war as “immoral” and “unjust” and denounced Israel’s attacks on Christians in Lebanon. Pope Leo, himself an American, has called the war a “scandal to the whole human family”.

The Israeli killing of Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei broke a norm in international relations in more ways than one. It was the first assassination of a head of state by a foreign country in many decades, and it was the first time in centuries, perhaps ever, that one of Shiism’s most senior grand ayatollahs had been killed by a foreign power.

Many other senior Shia clerics, some of who had a difficult and sometimes even antagonistic relationship with Khamenei and the system he represented, declared him a martyr. Assuming his father’s role as supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei delivered remarks that heavily emphasized martyrdom and messianism, including an opening reference to the “Hidden 12th Imam” who is meant to return on the day of judgement, according to Shia doctrine.

In Iran, Twelver Shia messianism and Iranian nationalism have long been interwoven, especially since the revolution of 1979. Now, Iran’s Shia clerics have declared the defense of the homeland as a sacred duty.

What the other branches of Islam think of the war is more complicated. Some senior non-Shia clerics, including the mufti of Oman, a prominent scholar of the Ibadi branch of Islam, have declared Khamenei a martyr. The Sunni mufti of Iraq even argued that all Muslims should support Iran. There have been protests denouncing the war in Pakistan, India, Yemen, Indonesia and beyond.

But other major Sunni clerical institutions or movements have not been so vociferous in their condemnation over the death of Khamenei or the need to support Iran. This, quite apart from the at times bitter antagonism between Sunnism and Shi'ism, also has to do with the fact that Iran swiftly started attacking major Sunni-majority countries that host American military bases.

Messianic and apocalyptic elements of all three major Abrahamic faith traditions have been instrumentalized by increasingly authoritarian leaders in a global confrontation. While there are voices in all three traditions criticizing this use of religion, it is setting a dangerous precedent.

And while the war has been criticized as being in breach of international law, the reckless use of religion to support this war has not. This should change.

---

The writer is a senior lecturer in global religious studies at the University of Bristol. This article is republished under a Creative Commons license.