Purim and the Modern Haman: Confronting the Iranian Regime
- Mark Sandler
- Mar 5
- 10 min read
This week, Jews around the world celebrate the holiday of Purim. Purim commemorates events described in the Book of Esther, set in ancient Persia. The Jewish people faced annihilation by decree, instigated by Haman, King Ahasuerus’s prime minister. Haman’s Jew-hatred was prompted by the refusal of Mordechai, a Jewish palace official, to bow down to him. Haman sought not only personal revenge, but the destruction of the Jewish people. Esther, adopted by her cousin, Mordechai, had been selected in a royal search to replace the deposed queen, but at her cousin’s urging, had kept her Jewish identity hidden from the king. Esther risked her life to expose Haman’s plot to the king, leading to Haman’s execution and the reversal of the decree against the Jews.
From Haman to Khamenei
Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of present-day Persia, represented the modern Haman. He made no secret of his regime’s intention to destroy the State of Israel. In 2014, he claimed that there was no cure for Israel but its destruction and predicted in 2015 that Israel will not exist in 25 years. His Holocaust denialism, descriptions of “filthy Zionist agents of the U.S.,” such as “the Jewish member of Trump’s family” and criminal targeting of Jews and Western allies worldwide made him the personification of evil in our lifetime.
For 37 years, Khamenei orchestrated a terror campaign domestically and internationally through his government’s own agencies, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its Quds Force. In 2012, Canada listed the IRGC’s Quds Force as a terrorist entity under our Criminal Code. It also designated the Islamic Republic of Iran as a State Supporter of Terrorism under the State Immunity Act.
This designation, which remains in place today, together with the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, allows victims to sue Iran, its terrorist agents, proxies and fellow perpetrators for losses or damages resulting from terrorist activities committed anywhere in the world. In 2024, Canada also listed, albeit belatedly, the IRGC itself as a terrorist entity.
In May 2020, the U.S. State Department released its report entitled Iran’s Assassinations and Terrorist Activity Abroad. It set out 360 assassinations carried out in the name of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Canada has also designated at least eight separate terrorist entities that operate as proxies of the Iranian regime or are otherwise tied closely to it:
Hamas
Hezbollah
Palestinian Islamic Jihad
Ansarallah, commonly referred to as the Houthis
Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade
Al-Ashtar Brigades
Fatemiyoun Division
Samidoun
Khamenei’s obsession with destroying Israel and his efforts to acquire the means to do so ultimately sealed his fate.
Nuclear Ambitions and the Road to War
When Iran’s terror proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, were severely weakened by Israel, the regime accelerated its efforts to build nuclear military capacity and produce thousands of ballistic missiles. As reported by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran had more than 400 kilograms of 60 per cent enriched uranium (for which the only use is as a weapon). If enriched to 90+ per cent, this represented enough uranium for 10 nuclear weapons.
Moreover, the regime repeatedly misled the IAEA, and attempted to conceal many of its nuclear activities. As Israeli-American scholar Yossi Klein Halevi explained, Israelis were no longer under any illusion that they can live next to a genocidal state whose explicit goal is to eradicate them. “When your enemy threatens to destroy you, take them at their word.”
Iran’s intention to both produce a nuclear weapon and significantly expand its conventional warfare capacity ultimately led to Israeli and then American military intervention in June 2025 (The 12 Day War).
One might have naively thought that the regime would reevaluate its preoccupation with terror abroad, especially in the face of its own severe economic problems. But no, the regime resumed its efforts to build a nuclear weapon, replenishing and expanding its arsenal of ballistic weapons. At home, it met unarmed protesters with mass killings within a 72 hour period at a pace unprecedented since the Rwandan genocide. Estimates vary greatly as to how many dissidents were killed and imprisoned, but they almost certainly number in the tens of thousands.
There was little reason to believe that further negotiations with this fanatic regime would produce safety and security for the world or abandonment of Khamenei’s mission to destroy Israel. Nevertheless, reliable reports indicate that the Americans delayed military action until Iran made its intentions unequivocal (although I would argue that its intentions were always clear). Its negotiators rejected an offer for free nuclear power as a substitute for domestic uranium enrichment. They also shamelessly told their American counterparts that they controlled 460 kilograms of 60 per cent enriched uranium and were aware that this uranium could produce 11 nuclear bombs. They continued to refuse access by UN inspectors to their pre-existing nuclear sites. Moreover, Israeli Intelligence reportedly discovered that they had created a new, undisclosed nuclear site.
Moral Clarity and the Western Double Standard
I believe that President Trump and the American government could do a much better job in clearly (and without hyperbole) articulating the underlying rationale for military action, its timing and how this military action is supported by international law. Trump tends to lead with a position (both in relation to this action and more dubious enterprises) that equates America’s capacity to take decisive military action with its right to do so.
However, I have little doubt about Israel’s moral and legal entitlement (recognized across the political spectrum within Israel by Netanyahu detractors and admirers alike) to address the continuing existential threat posed by the Iranian regime to Israel, it and the United States are still able to effectively do so. I adopt the point made by Melanie Phillips in her recent article, “Choosing lawfare over warfare:”
International law allows a state to assist in the defence of allies who are threatened. It was never intended as a suicide pact, forcing a country to sit on its hands while its mortal enemies develop weapons to destroy it.
Meanwhile, regardless of one’s views on whether the current military operation complies with international law, we continue to see an appalling double standard applied in evaluating the morality of this American-Israeli intervention against a terror regime. Vanessa Berg, in a piece entitled, "The Global Left’s War on Israel and the United States," contends that many on the “global Left” are more determined to undermine Israel and America than to confront the authoritarian regimes threatening global stability. Her analysis includes the following:
For decades, the Islamic Republic has defined itself through hostility to the United States and Israel. The regime’s founding thesis – chanted in the streets and institutionalized in its education system, media, mosques, and overall ideology – remains “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” Its proxies have killed hundreds of Americans, its militias destabilize multiple Middle Eastern states, and its leadership openly calls for Israel’s destruction.
And yet, in Western political discourse, the primary skepticism is often directed not at Tehran, but at Washington and Jerusalem.
...
If anything, the global Left should be the first ones cheering for the downfall of the Islamic Republic. It is a government that represses women, executes dissidents, imprisons journalists, persecutes religious minorities, and brutally suppresses its own people whenever they dare to demand freedom. It criminalizes homosexuality, enforces theocratic rule through violence, and exports extremism across an entire region. By every metric the global Left claims to care about – human rights, democracy, gender equality, and freedom of expression – the Islamic Republic stands as arguably the most oppressive regimes on earth.
And yet, when the possibility emerges that this regime might finally be weakened or even fall, many of the same voices that claim to champion those values suddenly find reasons to hesitate, object, or condemn the very forces confronting it. As the kids say these days: Make it make sense.
Canada, Extremism, and the Need for Action
And what about Canada?
Prime Minister Carney and Minister Anand issued a statement, indicating that “Canada supports the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from threatening international peace and security.” The statement described the Islamic Republic of Iran as “a principal source of instability and terror throughout the Middle East, has one of the world’s worst human rights records and must never be allowed to obtain or develop nuclear weapons.”
This statement did favourably distinguish Canada (and Australia’s) response from a number of Western countries. At the same time, the Prime Minister said his support came “with regret” because the conflict represented a failure of the international order.
Unfortunately, he also appeared to question whether the actions taken were consistent with international law. He has already been criticized in some Liberal (and other) circles for his support of the military action, support that those critics regard as abandoning international law or that they assume to be an unprincipled capitulation to American power. Some go so far as to equate the military campaign against Iran with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, or with America’s military campaign in Venezuela. I disagree. In my view, moral clarity leads to the opposite conclusion. Canada should say so.
The false equivalence between Putin’s malevolent attack on Ukraine, a country which posed no existential risk to Russia and the military action taken against the Iranian terror regime demonstrates why legal evaluations, whether applying international or domestic law, are so heavily dependent on the facts, not on legal principles untethered to those facts. Otherwise, to paraphrase the aggrieved Mr. Bumble in Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist, “the law is an ass.”
The third largest Iranian diaspora in the world is in Canada. We are enriched by the Iranian community. That diaspora appears to overwhelmingly support the dismantling of the Iranian regime. Indeed, many have been victimized by that regime or its proxies. Regardless of one’s views on the military action taken against that regime, the Iranian community needs our support, as the Jewish community needs theirs. Both communities understand the dangers of Islamism, and, in particular, the Iranian regime and its proxies. As the military campaign against the Iranian regime continues and potentially intensifies, both the Iranian and Jewish communities in Canada will undoubtedly be further targeted by hatemongers. We have already seen evidence of this in the last few days.
For several years, I (and others) have warned about the influence of the Iranian regime in Canada. The regime and its proxies have been responsible for a range of hate-motivated activities in Canada. In November 2024, I described the regime’s plot to assassinate our former Minister of Justice, Irwin Cotler, one of its most vocal critics. As I explained at the time, this plot could not be viewed in isolation. In 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice announced federal charges in several indictments against at least 11 individuals arising out of thwarted IRGC-initiated plots to kill Iranian-American political activist Masih Alinejad, to arrange a mass shooting of Israeli tourists in Sri Lanka, and to assassinate two pro-Israel Jewish businessmen living in New York City, and president-elect Donald Trump. Alinejad, a journalist and leading figure in the Iranian women’s dissident movement, had already been the target of prior kidnapping and assassination schemes.
In May 2020, the U.S. State Department released its report entitled Iran’s Assassinations and Terrorist Activity Abroad. It set out 360 assassinations carried out in the name of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The death of Khamenei and the weakening of the Iranian regime may reduce but will not eliminate the existing threat to Canadians. A significant number of anti-Israel protesters are more than willing to be aligned with this terror state and its agents and proxies operating here in Canada. This was true when I wrote about it in 2024 and remains true today. At the same time, the vast majority of Canadians remain uninformed about the full extent of Iran’s complicity in terrorism, and more importantly, its impact on Canadians.
In 2024, Charlotte Kates, leader of Samidoun (a designated terrorist organization in Canada and the United States), took time from her busy schedule of hatemongering to travel to Iran. There, she received a “human rights” award from the Iranian government (just another indication how the theatre of the absurd dominates international morality), appeared on Iranian television to glowingly endorse the October 7 massacres, and was lauded by the head of Iran’s judiciary, himself complicit in the gross human rights violations against Iranian citizens. Samidoun appears to remain active in Canada despite its designation as a terrorist entity. Kates was never charged despite overwhelming evidence that she wilfully promoted hatred against identifiable groups.
When I originally commented on the assassination plot against Irwin Cotler, I questioned whether Canada was adequately prepared to address Iranian-led extremism in our midst. I posed a series of questions in my previous editorial that remain unanswered. Similar questions can be asked about the radical left. At what point will Canadians recognize what is happening? And will it be too late?
Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, continues to be debated in Parliament. I identified a significant deficiency in the legislation: the absence of an offence of wilfully promoting designated terrorist groups and their activities. There appears to be some bipartisan support for such legislation¹, despite the impasse that currently exists over Bill C-9. The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police supports the creation of this new offence, as do almost 40 community organizations in their submissions to the House of Commons Justice Committee. In my view, this would represent a significant step forward in addressing those who continue to promote, amongst others, the activities of terrorist organizations, including the IRGC and its hit squads around the world.
Additional Resources
For readers interested in exploring these issues further, ALCCA has previously published a number of articles examining Iranian extremism, terrorism, and the impact of these threats on Canada and the Jewish community:
The Iranian Regime and its Influence in Canada: In the Aftermath of the U.S. Strikes Against the Regime’s Nuclear Sites - https://www.alcca.ca/post/the-iranian-regime-and-its-influence-in-canada-in-the-aftermath-of-the-us-strikes-on-nuclear-sites
Domestic Terrorism in Canada: Who’s Listening? - https://www.alcca.ca/post/domestic-terrorism-in-canada-who-is-listening
O Canada – Time to Stand on Guard for Thee - https://www.alcca.ca/post/o-canada-time-to-stand-on-guard-for-thee-bondi-beach-attack
Terrorism in Canada: From Recent Cases to ALCCA’s Calls to Action - https://www.alcca.ca/post/terrorism-in-canada-from-recent-cases-to-alcca-calls-to-action
Samidoun: A Stain on Canada's Reputation and the Rule of Law - https://www.alcca.ca/post/samidoun-a-continuing-stain-on-canadas-reputation-and-the-rule-of-law
In Memory of Yaron Lischinsky z'l and Sarah Milgrim z'l - https://www.alcca.ca/post/in-memory-of-yaron-lischinsky-and-sarah-milgrim
The Fight Against Canadian Extremism - https://www.alcca.ca/post/the-fight-against-canadian-extremism
A Wake Up Call for Canadians – The Plot to Assassinate Irwin Cotler - https://www.alcca.ca/post/a-wake-up-call-for-canadians-the-plot-to-assassinate-irwin-cotler
Samidoun – A Call to the Authorities for Further Action - https://www.alcca.ca/post/samidoun-a-call-to-the-authorities-for-further-action
--
Endnotes
About the Author
Mark Sandler, LL.B., LL.D. (honoris causa), ALCCA’s Chair, is widely recognized as one of Canada’s leading criminal lawyers and pro bono advocates. He has been involved in combatting antisemitism for over 40 years. He has lectured extensively on legal remedies to combat hate and has promoted respectful Muslim-Jewish, Sikh-Jewish and Black-Jewish dialogues. He has appeared before Parliamentary committees and in the Supreme Court of Canada on multiple occasions on issues relating to antisemitism and hate activities. He is a former member of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, a three-time elected Bencher of the Law Society of Ontario, and recipient of the criminal profession’s highest honour, the G. Arthur Martin Medal, for his contributions to the administration of criminal justice.