Iran International
A hardline cleric’s call to demolish the monument of Persian poet and scientist Omar Khayyam sparked widespread backlash this week, with many seeing it as an assault on Iran’s national identity by religious hardliners.
The controversy erupted after a preacher, identified only by his last name, Robati, claimed in a sermon that Khayyam’s monument was deliberately built to overshadow an adjacent Shia shrine where he was speaking. His comments came just a day after large crowds gathered at the mausoleum in Neyshabur on March 21 to celebrate Nowruz, the Persian New Year. Some in the crowd also chanted anti-government and pro-monarchy slogans in favor of the last ruling dynasty, including “Reza Shah, bless your soul.”
The cleric was initially mistaken for the Friday prayer leader of Neyshabur, but later reports clarified that he was a local preacher speaking at the shrine of 9th-century Shia saint Muhammad ibn-e Husayn, known as Emamzadeh Mahruq.
The remarks sparked swift condemnations, with critics accusing hardliners of attempting to erase Iran’s historical and cultural heritage. “Destroying historical memory by demolishing national symbols is one of the most dangerous and costly acts of ignorance that threaten a country’s national security,” wrote academic and political analyst Mehdi Motaharnia on X.
Amid the growing backlash, several government officials, including the Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance Abbas Salehi, the President’s Executive Deputy Jafar Ghaempanah, and prominent reformist politician Azar Mansoori, criticized the attack on national symbols and warned about its consequences.
“Juxtaposing religious symbols with Iran’s national and historical heritage, whoever it benefits, is a massive mistake,” Mansoori posted on X.
Khayyam is celebrated not only for his philosophical quatrains (rubaʿiyat), remarkably secular for their time, but also for his contributions to mathematics, astronomy, and the development of the Jalali calendar, which remains Iran’s official calendar. His poetry, popularized in the West through Edward FitzGerald’s 19th-century translations, has earned him global recognition, while his scientific achievements have left a lasting impact. In Iran, his legacy is deeply ingrained in the culture, with many knowing at least a few of his verses by heart.
Thousands of Iranians flocked to the monuments of Iran's national poets Omar Khayyam in Neyshabur, Ferdowsi in Mashhad, and Hafiz in Shiraz, as well as historical sites such as Persepolis, on March 21 to celebrate the Persian New Year with music and dancing. At some gatherings, people also chanted anti-government slogans.
In the wake of the Nowruz celebrations, authorities in Khorasan-e Razavi Province shut down the mausoleums of both Khayyam and Ferdowsi, Iran’s other literary giant, citing the coincidence with Shia mourning days.
There was a dispute over the boundaries of Khayyam’s mausoleum and the adjacent shrine between the Religious Endowments Organization and the Cultural Heritage Organization for several decades.
The current monument, designed by renowned architect Hooshang Seyhoun, was inaugurated in the 1960s under the Shah. Khayyam was originally buried in a small structure beside the shrine in 1131, his bones were exhumed and reburied in the new monument built at a distance from the shrine.
The Shia shrine is several centuries old. An older shrine on the site is believed to have been destroyed during the Mogul invasion of Iran in the 13th century. The current building is believed to be from the 16th century. Many additions, including the tile work, date from later periods.
In two speeches delivered in the opening days of Nowruz, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei appeared to indirectly respond to US President Donald Trump's letter proposing a new deal.
In his first address, a pre-recorded message aired on state television, Khamenei blamed the United States for instability in the region. In the second, delivered live, he denied commanding Iran’s regional proxy forces but warned Washington of a strong response to its military actions in the region.
Tehran has yet to issue an official response to Trump’s letter, as few details of its contents have been made public. In a New Year’s Eve interview with state TV, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the letter included “many threats and a few opportunities.” He added that Tehran is still evaluating the message. Meanwhile, US media reported that Trump gave the ayatollah two months to consider before replying.
Perhaps in an attempt to ease the pressure on Khamenei, Reformist commentator Ahmad Zeidabadi suggested in a tweet that the Islamic Republic should hold a referendum to determine the will of the people.
Given the widespread concerns expressed on social media and in call-ins to Persian-language TV channels based in Europe and the United States, it's clear that the economy—and its impact on daily life—is the top priority for most Iranians. It would not be difficult to predict the likely outcome of such a referendum.
In a post on X, Ahmad Zeidabadi wrote that Iran has two months to choose between war and an agreement with the United States. “Tehran must make a decision while its officials are unprepared for either option,” he said, adding, “They believe an agreement would bring humiliation, while a war could be devastating. Hence, the indecision.”
Zeidabadi warned that some are exploring a so-called third path—one that could ultimately lead to both humiliation and destruction. He noted that the current situation was foreseeable and, in fact, some politicians had predicted it, but their warnings went unheeded.
He also pointed out that while referenda are mentioned in Article 59 of Iran’s Constitution as tools to resolve difficult political, economic, social, and cultural issues, they have never been clearly defined or seriously pursued within the Islamic Republic’s framework.
Khamenei, however, has consistently rejected the idea of holding a referendum on any issue, dismissing proposals even from well-wishers like former presidents Hassan Rouhani and Mohammad Khatami on multiple occasions.
Yet, a referendum could offer him a way to resolve the current impasse—allowing him to shift the burden of any potential compromise with the United States onto the people. Still, many who commented on Zeidabadi’s post on X argued that no meaningful referendum is possible under current conditions. They noted that without a free press, functioning political parties, and open public debate, a genuine vote would be impossible. They also called for an end to the imprisonment of political activists, the unblocking of social media platforms, and guarantees for freedom of expression and assembly as prerequisites for any credible referendum.
Some analysts believe the mix of threats and defiance in Khamenei’s recent speeches suggests he is thinking aloud, searching for a way out of the current impasse. As he acknowledged in his first address, Iran’s main challenge is its struggling economy, severely weakened by US sanctions. While he is unwilling to appear submissive to his archenemy, America, the only viable path to economic relief may lie in accepting Trump’s conditions—an option that would be especially difficult for a leader known for his uncompromising stance.
Others pointed out that the government has consistently ignored public opinion in the past and holding a referendum now would be shifting responsibility onto the people for any potential compromise. Some expressed skepticism that even after a referendum, the Iranian government would truly respect the people’s will.
One commenter remarked that, as usual, Iranians would be left choosing between “bad and worse.” Still, some speculated that Zeidabadi may be hoping a referendum would give like-minded reformists an opportunity to participate more freely in the political process.