Masih Alinejad, an Iranian-American journalist and outspoken critic of the Iranian regime, sharply criticized New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani for his public condemnation of U.S. and Israeli military strikes against Iran. The airstrikes, which took place over the weekend, targeted key Iranian leadership, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was reportedly killed during the operation. While many Iranian dissidents celebrated the strike as a historic and long-awaited development, Mamdani expressed concern over the escalation on social media, framing the attacks as part of an illegal war of aggression. He described the bombings of cities and casualties as catastrophic and warned that Americans were uninterested in another foreign conflict.
Mamdani, a socialist and practicing Muslim, elaborated that Americans were focused on domestic issues such as the affordability crisis and desired peace rather than regime change abroad. His comments were framed as a caution against military escalation, suggesting that the human cost of war, particularly civilian casualties, must be considered. This perspective, however, drew immediate backlash from members of the Iranian diaspora, who perceived it as a defense of the Iranian regime rather than a neutral critique of war. Critics argued that Mamdani overlooked decades of systemic oppression and human rights violations perpetrated by Tehran.
Alinejad, who survived a foiled assassination plot by Iranian operatives in New York in 2024, responded directly to Mamdani on social media platform X. She accused him of remaining silent during prior massacres in Iran and argued that his current condemnation of military action ignored the suffering of Iranian citizens. “STOP lecturing us Iranians about peace,” she tweeted, emphasizing that safety without justice is meaningless. She highlighted the regime’s violence against women, including the forced veiling and jailing of female protesters, as well as the broader repression that had led to thousands of deaths and injuries. Her statements positioned the Iranian-American community as morally opposed to any rhetoric that could be interpreted as sympathizing with the Tehran government.
In her remarks, Alinejad underscored the disconnect she perceived between Mamdani’s criticism and the lived reality of Iranians both in the homeland and abroad. She stated that she did not feel safe hearing his defense of a regime responsible for mass killings, describing his comments as out of touch with the struggle for freedom in Iran. By framing his words as excusing state-sponsored terrorism, she drew a sharp moral distinction between diaspora Iranians advocating for democracy and politicians she perceives as inadvertently legitimizing oppressive actors. Her argument reflected longstanding tensions between diaspora voices and local political leaders on matters of foreign policy, ethics, and solidarity.
Beyond social media, Alinejad reiterated her criticism during a televised interview with CBS News, speaking alongside Moj Mahdara, an Iranian-American entrepreneur and co-founder of the Iranian Diaspora Collective. Mahdara emphasized the strategic importance of recognizing threats in the Middle East and argued that the Democratic Party needed to prioritize national security over domestic political biases. The interview conveyed a broader message about the role of U.S. leadership in protecting both its citizens and regional partners, particularly Gulf states, amid ongoing military tensions with Iran.
Meanwhile, diplomatic signals from Washington suggested cautious optimism about engagement with Iran’s emerging leadership. A senior White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, noted that potential new leaders in Iran had indicated a willingness to negotiate with the United States. While President Donald Trump remains open to talks in principle, the official clarified that the military operation continues for now. The situation highlights the dual-track approach being pursued by U.S. policymakers: maintaining pressure through military means while exploring avenues for diplomatic engagement with Iran’s evolving leadership. The interplay between domestic criticism, diaspora advocacy, and international diplomacy continues to shape the broader conversation around U.S. policy in the region.
against terrorism not those who excuse it.”
