In a revealing display of the internal discord gripping Iran’s ruling factions, the daily Etemad launched a scathing critique of Ahmad Alamolhoda, the hardline Friday prayer leader of Mashhad and a representative of the regime’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. The publication, which advocates for preserving the regime through superficial reforms and easing international pressure, targeted Alamolhoda for his inflammatory remarks accusing members of parliament of espionage.
Alamolhoda had claimed, “The parliament is the most sensitive point for enemy plots and infiltration. The enemy doesn’t send spies to the parliament; they hire and elect them. Therefore, the parliament is the most suitable place for selecting spies.” These accusations, made during a meeting with Basij members, triggered a sharp backlash from other regime figures. Mohammad Mehdi Shahriari, a member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, called Alamolhoda’s remarks “crisis-inducing,” urging authorities to hold the cleric accountable.
“If the Mashhad Friday prayer leader sees spies in the parliament, he must report them to the Ministry of Intelligence or the IRGC Intelligence Organization,” Shahriari said. “Making sweeping accusations without evidence creates unnecessary problems and imposes heavy costs on the country.”
Etemad highlighted Alamolhoda’s long-standing divisiveness, pointing to past incendiary statements. The cleric once said the British ambassador should be “torn to pieces” and referred to students who refused to step on the U.S. flag as “fifth columns of the enemy” who “deserve to be torn apart.” The newspaper also noted his declining popularity, quoting him as admitting, “People don’t listen to our sermons or attend Friday prayers. Even the televised sermons are ignored, and only what others write and headline about us gets noticed.”
This conflict underscores the regime’s internal power struggle as it grapples with economic collapse, international isolation, and rising public dissent. The warring factions, though united in preserving the regime, remain deeply divided over tactics. Alamolhoda’s critics accuse him of inflaming tensions and provoking further discontent with his incendiary rhetoric. Meanwhile, extremist elements like Alamolhoda double down on aggression, viewing retreat as synonymous with collapse.
The escalating tensions highlight the regime’s inability to contain its internal divisions, which are aggravated by growing fears of a popular uprising. The clerical regime’s insistence on crushing dissent while intensifying internal conflicts reveals its vulnerability. These public disputes, combined with the increasing resentment among the populace, illustrate a regime on the defensive, struggling to maintain its grip on power.