For India, home to one of the largest Shia populations outside of Iran, the events unfolding in Tehran are not a distant West Asian headline. The reverberations from the sweeping anti-regime protests in Iran and the mounting threat of an American strike against the theocracy have reached our streets, eliciting a strong response from some members of the Shia community.
On Wednesday, January 14, crowds gathered across key locations in the Kargil district of Jammu and Kashmir staging huge protests in support of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and against American and Israeli intervention in Iran’s internal affairs. Visuals coming out of Kargil, of large crowds waving the Indian and Iranian flags, holding pictures, posters and banners of Iran’s Supreme leader, while not an endorsement of Iran’s internal politics, remind us of the historical, religious, cultural and symbolic influence the Ayatollah wields over certain sections of the Shia community. Similar pro-regime demonstrations were also reported in Kashmir’s Budgam and Pulwana districts. Such expressions in sensitive geographies require a proactive approach rooted in community outreach and intelligence gathering to ensure it doesn’t lead to major internal fissures, which can potentially be appropriated or exploited by external adversaries.
From Religious Affinity to Public Expression
A minority within a minority, the Indian Shia Muslims make up about 15% of India’s domestic Muslim population, traditionally living in places like Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh, Telangana, Karnataka.
Iran’s clerical leadership has occupied a unique position in the Shia religious imagination. The 1979 Iranian Revolution, led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, ushered in the policy of Velayat-e faqih or ‘Governance of a Jurist’. This transformed the clergy from a religious authority to a political actor. For some across the globe, this fusion of faith and state elevated the Supreme Leader’s position from a national figure to a civilisational symbol. In India, that symbolism carried added weight: Khomeini’s ancestral roots trace back to Barabanki, a city in Uttar Pradesh. Khomeini’s grandfather, Sayyed Ahmed Musavi Hindi, was born in Barabanki’s Kintur village. He was regarded as a reputable religious scholar. In early 1800s, he left India for Najaf in present day Iran then a leading centre of Shia theological learning. Around 1834, he relocated permanently to the Iranian town of Khomein, decades before it became known as the birthplace of Iran’s revolutionary leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Despite settling in Iran, Sayyed Ahmed retained the surname ‘Hindi’ throughout his life, reportedly as a deliberate nod to his Indian origins. This gave the revolution, already seen as a defining moment in Shia history, a more personal and familiar resonance for the Indian community.
When Khamenei, groomed by Khomeini, succeeded him in 1989 as the next Supreme Leader, not only did he inherit the position but also the symbolic authority that came with it. Over a four decade long, though controversial, rule in Iran, Khamenei further solidified his influence and control, presenting himself as a defender of not just Shia interests but at times even of the Muslim world, particularly through his positioning on Gaza, Syria, and Yemen.
“Ayatollah Khamenei is not just Iran’s leader. He’s the religious guide of the entire Shia world. If even a single hair on his head is harmed, we will make sure Americans and Israelis find India’s land too narrow for their feet,” a senior Shia cleric in Lucknow was quoted as saying in June 2025, post Israel’s strike on Iran.
While this rhetoric is not universal, and should not be read literally, his words provide a window, albeit with an exaggerated view, of how some within India’s Shia community feel about the leader.
Indian Support for Khamenei
From the streets of Srinagar and Kargil in the north to Dargahs and mosques in Lucknow and Unnao and Muharram processions in Hyderabad – posters of Ali Khamenei are a common sighting. Villages like Karnataka’s Alipur, with a 90% Shia population, are even referred to as ‘mini Iran’, given the close religious and business linkages. Iranian outreach to India includes cultural centres, educational exchanges, humanitarian initiatives and religious programmes. Tehran even maintains an official representative of the Supreme Leader in India, tasked with cultural and religious engagement across communities. These representations have played a pivotal role in the significant ties between India and Iran.
None of this is clandestine, nor is it unique to Iran. It does, however, reflect how developments in Iran can resonate within parts of the Indian Shia community. This symbolic affinity has previously spilled onto Indian streets as well – at times in the form of clashes over a torn poster of Iran’s Supreme Leader in Bijnor in July 2025, other times through demonstrations in response to the events related to Iran. In May 2024, the streets of Srinagar saw solidarity marches and candlelight sit-ins in when Iran’s then President Ebrahim Raisi along with his foreign minister died in a helicopter crash. In January 2020, when U.S. drone strikes killed Qassim Soleimani, head of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force, some sit-ins were seen in Kargil and Budgam districts of Jammu and Kashmir. In October 2024, candlelight marches were also observed in Hyderabad over the killing of Hassan Nasrallah, the Iran-backed Hezbollah leader of Lebanon. In June 2025, thousands gathered at places like Dargah Hazrat Abbas and Asafi Masjid in Lucknow with demonstrations against U.S-Israeli strikes on Iran. Slogans, speeches and prayers were observed as the leaders clearly stated that any threat to the Supreme Leader is a “red line”.
These demonstrations, including the one that recently unfolded on January 14, are typically in opposition to external pressure on Iran rather than an endorsement of its internal policies. They have usually been small, localised and largely peaceful. However, when a political leader is viewed as sacred, any developments surrounding them can trigger an emotional response across borders. Thus, should Iran’s theocratic system fracture, or threats of an American intervention materialise, the risk for India will not be mass mobilisation or radicalisation, but concentrated, emotionally charged reactions in these sensitive geographies.
Iran’s Protests
Fuelled by American sanctions, the war with Israel and internal corruption, the economic situation in Iran had been on the downturn. On December 28, the rial hit a record low – 1.48 million to a dollar. Merchants shut shop and took to the streets citing their inability to do business. Local Iranians, who had been reeling from the pinches of inflation and high commodity prices quickly joined in support. What started on the streets of the Grand Tehran Bazaar spread across the 31 provinces over the next few days, evolving into Iran’s most consequential protest in recent years. From Mashhad to Zahedan, chants of “Death to the Dictator,” “Death to Khamenei,” echoed through the streets, calling not just for economic reform but an overhaul of the theocratic system. The momentum, in part, also came from calls by Reza Pahlavi, the son of the former Shah of Iran, who urged Iranians to, “take to the streets and, as a united front, shout your demands”.
The regime came down heavily, though predictably, on the protestors, dubbing them as ‘troublemakers’ and ‘vandals’ trying to please the West. While at first, Iran’s reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian, made overtures to calm the unrest, showing his government’s willingness to listen, he too eventually outsourced the grievances of the people as American propaganda. Security forces moved swiftly to suppress the unrest, deploying tear gas, live ammunition and mass arrests, alongside a nationwide internet blackout. The crackdown has turned deadly. Reports suggest almost 550 dead and more than 20,000 detained, however, the real numbers remain unverified.
An American strike?
The U.S. and Israel loudly supported the people protesting, with Trump threatening intervention if the Iranian regime “violently kills protestors.” From comments like the U.S. being “locked and loaded and ready to go” to asking Iranians to “keep protesting – take over your institutions… Help is on its way,” the eventuality of an American strike was becoming imminent.
Although Trump shortly dialled back his strike stance at one point, when he said the Iranian government assured him that protestors won’t be executed, the past precedent of the American strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and America’s growing military buildup in the region made it difficult to trust the American leader’s posturing even then.
Trump then reiterated the possibility of an American strike, suggesting an “aramada” was on its way to Iran, and if Iran prosecuted protestors, the American intervention would make the June strikes “look like peanuts.” However, he has now openly given an ultimatum to Iran suggesting they agree to a deal. However, Trump’s latest threat lacks any mention of the protests and has circled back to the issue of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.
“Hopefully Iran will quickly ‘Come to the Table’ and negotiate a fair and equitable deal – NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS – one that is good for all parties,” the American president wrote on his Truth Social account. “Time is running out, it is truly of the essence!”
This is supplemented by heavy American military deployment in the region. US CENTCOM confirmed that USS Abraham Lincoln, the nuclear powered aircraft carrier, along with three destroyers – USS Frank E. Petersen, Jr, USS Spruance and USS Michael Murphy, have been deployed to the region. The warship moved from the South China Sea to the Indian Ocean. Several F-15Es have also been redirected to the American base in Jordan taking the total count of F15s on the base to about 35. Apart from deployments, the U.S. is also holding multiple drills in the region. U.S. Air Forces Central Command, the U.S. Air Force’s component for the Middle East and Central Asia, reportedly said that the drills aim to sharpen the U.S. Air Force’s ability to rapidly deploy personnel and aircraft, operate from dispersed locations and sustain operations with a minimal footprint.
Trump’s remarks and American military deployment has regional actors deeply worried. None of the countries want or can afford an all-out war in the region – something experts warn could occur in case of an American strike on Iran. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have refused to allow their airspace to be used for an attack on Iran while others are trying to dissuade American action and facilitate talks with Iran.
Against these developments, it is imperative for India to monitor the external and internal situation very closely.
The Case for Caution Without Panic
The most likely response to these developments will be symbolic protests or religious demonstrations by a small subset of Shias. On their own, such expressions fall well within democratic norms and don’t present any threats. This is, in no way, a suggestion of inevitability or a call to panic but a reminder that global events can have unexpected local consequences.
The Indian Shia community is no proxy for Iran. It is a diverse, moderate, and deeply integrated part of Indian society. Iran, meanwhile, remains a vital strategic and economic partner, and New Delhi has consistently treated Iran’s domestic issues as an internal matter. Civilisational ties, connectivity projects, energy security and trade form the pillars of this partnership. On the ongoing protests too, India has given a measured response. On January 14, the Indian External Affairs Minister Dr Jaishankar held a phone call with his Iranian counterpart to discuss the current situation. While the Indian statement said the evolving situation was discussed, reports quoting IRNA said Dr Jaishankar stressed the need to preserve stability and prevent tensions from escalating.
The risk arises from the broader environment in which such mobilisation takes place and the possibility of such acts being exploited or appropriated by adversarial actors, like Pakistan-backed groups, who are trying to inflame tensions or reframe the situation to their advantage. Recent instances of Hamas commanders appearing at events in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir alongside Lashkar and JeM members underline how interconnected the West Asia and South Asia security theatres have become in recent times. Given that national security planning rests on contingencies not averages, India must ensure preparedness without overstating the threat or securitising religious affinity or political expression.
