Religious and political statements are among the most important instruments for shaping public discourses in the Muslim world. Through their language, rhetorical structures, and persuasive strategies, such texts can influence public opinion as well as political and social orientations. Among these texts, statements issued by international religious institutions play a significant role in articulating religious, ethical, and political positions toward regional developments. Nevertheless, the use of speech acts in such statements and their discursive functions have received limited scholarly attention.

Using a descriptive-analytical method and drawing on John Searle’s speech act theory, this study analyzes the speech acts employed in the statement issued by the International Union of Muslim Scholars concerning the Zionist regime’s attacks on Damascus, Hama, and Lebanon. The data of the study consist of the full text of the statement, which is examined according to Searle’s five categories of speech acts: assertives, directives, commissives, expressives, and declarations. The main research question is: What types of speech acts are used in the statement of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, and how are these speech acts employed to shape religious and political discourse and to encourage the audience to take action against Zionist aggression? The findings indicate that the most frequent direct speech acts in the statement are assertive acts, accounting for 60 percent of the total, followed by directive and expressive acts. At the level of indirect speech acts, directive acts have the highest frequency, which reflects the speakers’ attempt to motivate the audience toward political and social action. Overall, the results show that the statement, through the combination of assertive, directive, and expressive acts, seeks to analyze the existing political situation, strengthen solidarity within the Muslim world, and call its audience to practical response and action.