The Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (MP-IDSA) organised a Fellows Seminar on 22 August 2025, where Dr. Adil Rasheed, Research Fellow, presented his paper titled “Messianism: Concept, Features and Geopolitical Manifestations.” The session was chaired by Ambassador Sujan R. Chinoy, Director General, MP-IDSA. Ambassador Talmiz Ahmad, former Ambassador to Oman, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and presently Distinguished Professor at Symbiosis International University, Pune, joined as the External Discussant. The Internal Discussant was Dr. Ashok Behuria, Senior Fellow and Coordinator of the South Asia Centre, MP-IDSA.

Executive Summary

The Seminar explored how the belief in a Messiah or a saviour figure at the end of times continues to shape politics, societies, and state behaviour. Dr. Rasheed argued that messianic ideas, which include apocalyptic and utopian mythologies, are not limited to religious beliefs but even influence modern nationalist, ideological, and secular movements. Drawing on examples from Iran, Israel, ISIS, Pakistan, US-based dispensationalists, Russia, and China, he stressed that these narratives mobilise followers and leave a global geopolitical impact. The discussion highlighted the dangers of messianic myths when tied to power, violence, and geopolitics, while also emphasising the need for careful analysis to distinguish between genuine theological traditions and opportunistic uses of such rhetoric.

Detailed Report

Initial Comments by the Chairperson

Ambassador Sujan R.Chinoy

In his opening remarks, Ambassador Chinoy explained that messianism is both a spiritual and a political force. While it inspires devotion, history shows that it has also provoked wars and upheavals. He pointed out that the Abrahamic religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, have been most associated with messianic traditions, but these ideas have also influenced secular ideologies like Fascism, Marxism, and Neo-conservatism. He stated that Dr. Rasheed’s paper might help provide a framework to better understand how messianic themes might influence international geopolitics.

Presentation by Dr. Adil Rasheed

Dr. Rasheed began by defining messianism as the belief in the arrival of a Messiah, a redeemer who establishes justice and peace at the end of times. Though strongly present in the Abrahamic faiths, he stressed that similar ideas have emerged across societies, including secular thought. Movements such as Fascism and Marxism, he argued, drew on utopian and redemptive impulses that resemble religious salvation.

Dr. Rasheed explained how contemporary religious and political movements have woven messianic themes into their agendas. Examples include Salafi Jihadism, Shia Mahdism, Evangelical Dispensationalism, Revisionist Zionism, Neo-Conservatism and even Slavic nationalism. Once politicised, these narratives do not remain abstract but influence state policy, militant strategies, and interstate relations.

West Asia, he noted, is one of the main theatres where such politics is visible. Iran’s former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad invoked the Hidden Imam during his UN speech in 2005, and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei declared that Israel would not survive beyond 25 years. Tehran even installed a countdown clock in the capital to reinforce this message. While Iranian leaders claim to separate anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism, the rhetoric still fuels fears of an eventual religious conflict.

Sunni groups also make use of such themes. ISIS portrayed itself as the beginning of a prophesied caliphate, citing the Syrian town of Dabiq as the site of an end-time battle. By linking itself with apocalyptic prophecies, the group tried to legitimise violence and attract recruits.

Dr. Rasheed then discussed how Jews, despite being the originators of the messianic idea, often became its greatest victims. He traced centuries of persecution, from massacres in Alexandria in 38 CE, to the Crusades, expulsions from England, France and Spain, the Black Death pogroms, the Spanish Inquisition, Russian pogroms, and ultimately the Holocaust. Even in modern Israel, political leaders still draw on messianic themes. He mentioned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ties with Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, who was revered as a messianic figure and had once predicted Netanyahu’s rise. Biblical references in Netanyahu’s speeches, he said, also illustrate how such narratives enter modern politics.

Dr. Rasheed further highlighted the role of Christian Zionism. In the United States, many evangelicals believe support for Israel is essential for the fulfilment of prophecy and the Second Coming of Christ. This theological conviction has become politically influential, shaping US foreign policy. Statements from leaders like US Senator Ted Cruz, Dr. Rasheed argued, reveal how messianic worldviews can translate into real political commitments.

South Asia too is not free of these currents. In Pakistan, both military and political elites have used religious prophecies such as Ghazwa-e-Hind to justify policies and rhetoric. General Asim Munir’s speech in April 2025, shortly before the Pahalgam attack, described Pakistan as a divinely ordained state, which Dr. Rasheed said was evidence of messianic framing within its national identity.

Beyond the region, he also drew attention to Russia’s “Third Rome” idea, neo-Nazi movements in Europe, and aspects of Chinese strategic thought that sometimes present themselves in civilisational, quasi-messianic terms.

Dr. Rasheed then explained the theological foundations of messianism in Judaism, Christianity and Islam. For Jews, the Messiah is a descendant of King David who will rebuild the Temple and restore Israel. For Christians, Jesus Christ is already the Messiah, whose Second Coming will bring the Kingdom of God. For Muslims, Jesus is also the Messiah, but his return will be preceded by the Mahdi. He briefly touched upon non-Abrahamic traditions too, like the Hindu belief in the Kalki Avatar and the Buddhist expectation of Maitreya, though he noted that these ideas have not yet taken militarised forms.

He drew on Anson Rabinbach’s typology of messianism, restorative, utopian, apocalyptic and expectative. He contrasted quietist forms, which wait for divine will, with activist forms that seek to hasten the Messiah’s arrival through deliberate action, even conflict. He concluded by noting that India must take these ideological undercurrents into account when dealing with states where such ideas shape political culture.

Comments by the External Discussant

Ambassador Talmiz Ahmad

Ambassador Ahmad began by recalling how his own study of messianism had grown out of research for his book Children of Abraham at War. He explained that he first turned to the subject while trying to understand why Judaism, Christianity and Islam had been repeatedly caught in violent conflict. Through this, he found the deep traditions of messianic expectation across all three.

He explained how Jewish messianic hopes were shaped by centuries of exile and persecution, while European anti-Semitism, from the Crusades to the Black Death, fuelled repeated invocations of redemption. He then traced how Protestant premillennialism in the 19th Century laid the basis for Christian Zionism. For American evangelicals, support for Israel became tied to their eschatological vision, creating political alliances that were convenient for both sides.

On Islam, he argued that messianism was historically less central but grew in importance after the Arab defeat in 1967. In times of despair, he observed, societies often turned to prophecy for hope. Still, he stressed that groups like al-Qaeda were pragmatic and strategic rather than deeply messianic. Shia traditions around the Hidden Imam carried more weight, but he warned against equating faith with politics.

He then offered a frank critique of the paper. He suggested that too many themes need not be grouped under messianism. Nationalism and racism, he argued, could not meaningfully be seen as messianic. He also felt that references to non-Abrahamic religions or leaders like Putin stretched the argument.  Instead, he suggested, the focus should remain on the Abrahamic core.

He further argued that messianism should not be overstated as the main driver of conflict. Geopolitics, nationalism and identity are stronger forces, with messianic rhetoric often serving as a tool rather than the cause. He gave examples such as George W. Bush’s religious imagery during the “War on Terror” and the selective use of scripture by Jewish extremists.

In conclusion, he urged Dr. Rasheed to sharpen the framework, distinguish clearly between theology and politics, and avoid placing too many movements under one label.

Comments by the Internal Discussant

Dr. Ashok Behuria

Dr. Behuria, began by emphasising that research in social sciences thrives on diverse perspectives rather than absolute truths. He praised Dr. Rasheed’s effort and argued that messianism should not be restricted to the Abrahamic religions alone. Non-Semitic traditions, he noted, also contain messianic themes. He pointed to the Bhagavad Gita, where Lord Krishna promises to return in different eras to restore balance in favour of ‘Dharma’, as an example.

He welcomed Dr. Rasheed’s reference to thinkers such as Carl Jung and Giorgio Agamben. Jung’s ideas of archetypes and the collective unconscious, he noted, offer a useful way to explain how symbols and myths continue to shape culture and politics. On Agamben, he highlighted the distinction between “messianism” and “messianicity,” as well as the notion of “inoperativity,” which describes how existing structures can be suspended to allow new possibilities.

At the same time, he advised that if the paper intends to go beyond Abrahamic cases, then examples from Hinduism and Buddhism should be developed more fully, rather than dealing with them briefly. He also noted that certain movements, such as American Israel Public Affairs Committee (IPAC), were cited but not explained in detail. Expanding these, he suggested, would give the work a more balanced scope.

He concluded by describing the paper as a valuable primer on the subject and encouraged Dr. Rasheed to refine it further.

Q & A Session

Dr. Rajiv Nayan praised the choice of topic but said the definition of messianism needed greater clarity. Was Dr. Rasheed restricting it to the Abrahamic faiths, or taking it in a broader sense? He also urged that claims about its influence should be backed by data, and asked whether messianic politics truly mobilises large groups today, given declining religiosity in some societies.

Dr. Saurabh Mishra recommended a stronger methodology, suggesting historical as well as contemporary analysis to show how messianic beliefs affect politics. He said exploring figures like Sri Krishnadevaraya could provide useful insights.

Dr. Arnab Dasgupta asked how a messianic leader or state might be identified in practice, and how societies could move on after such leaders—a process he termed “demessianisation.” He also raised a question related to Pakistan, pointing to General Asim Munir’s speeches after the Jaffar Express attack in March 2025, where he used religious references.  He asked how such rhetoric should be situated within the broader framework of messianism.

Comments by the Chairperson

The Chairperson, Ambassador Chinoy, offered his reflections, noting that while the paper should not become overextended, parallels from history and ideology could be useful. He cited Donald Trump’s survival after an assassination attempt, which he framed in religious language, and the Spanish conquest of the Americas, which carried strong messianic zeal. He contrasted this with the British Empire, which avoided such religious fervour. He also referred to Marxism and Maoism as movements with utopian, quasi-messianic claims.

Sharing further thoughts on the subject, Ambassador Ahmad, reminded the participants that religion has often been a tool of political mobilisation. He gave examples from the Crusades, Nazi Germany, Ahmadinejad’s presidency, and Israel after 1967. He also drew parallels between Pakistan’s idea of itself as a “second Madina” and the Zionist project. He concluded that while messianic zeal persists, it does not single-handedly drive global politics.

Dr. Rasheed responded to the questions and thanked the participants.

Report was prepared by Mr. Harsh Yadav, Intern, West Asia Centre, MP-IDSA.