Persian Nationalism, Identity and Anti-Arab Sentiments in Iranian Facebook Discourses
Critical Discourse Analysis and Social Media Communication
Majid KhosraviNik
Mahrou Zia
This study adopts a Critical Discourse Analytical approach to investigate how a form of Iranian national(ist) identity is (re)constructed and (re)presented on a popular Facebook Page called Persian Gulf
. It focuses on linguistic practices of the Iranian side of the debate over the name of this body of water. After briefly discussing some of the challenges of applying CDA to a participatory web platform e.g. Facebook, This paper explores the characteristics of the Persian identity discourse in the way that it is utilised to legitimize the name Persian Gulf vs. the claim to the name Arabian Gulf. The paper concludes that the emergent Persian national/ist identity discourse is strongly preoccupied with opposing a perceived cultural invasion of the Arabic Other in its emphatic defence of the name Persian Gulf but in the meantime it aspires to distinguish itself from the officially propagated Islamic identity. It is also shown that aspects pertaining to powerfulness, defiance and conflict are the main thrusts of the discursive representation of this Self-identity. Key words: Critical Discourse Analysis; Social Media discourses analysis; Facebook; National identity; Nationalism; Iran; Persian Gulf; Arab identity; the Middle East.
Published online: 11 February 2015
DOI:
10.1075/jlp.13.4.08kho
https://benjamins.com/#catalog/journals/jlp.13.4.08kho/details
Non-Persian Iran
When most people think of Iran, they think “Death to America,” terrorists and turbans, evil-looking beards and missiles rising from bright, arid canyons. If they think further, some might recall the past glories of Persian empires, or the fabled Peacock Throne the former Shah aspired to occupy. But even among so-called Iran “experts,” few consider this simple and far-reaching fact: in today’s Iran, Persians are at best a feeble majority, possibly as small as 51 percent of the total population.
Real figures for Iran’s minority populations are hard to come by. The Shah conducted a regular census, but its primary aim, according to the Encylopaedia Iranica, was to “count the de jure sedentary population and the de facto mobile and tribal population.” Similarly, under the current regime, which seized power in 1979, the census has counted the urban versus the rural population, and gathered basic age and employment statistics. But never was the explosive issue of ethnic origin or identity asked.
A ground-breaking report published in 2008 by the Congressional Research Service found that Iran’s then 70.5 million people are “ethnically, religiously, and linguistically diverse. The central authority is dominated by Persians, who constitute 51 percent of Iran’s population.”
So who are these non-Persian minorities? They are Azeris, Kurds, Lurs, Qashqai’is, Ahwazis, Arabs, Balouchis, Turkmens, Afsharis, Gilaki and Mazandaranis. They live predominantly on Iran’s periphery, where they control Iran’s access to the outside world. In the cases of the Azeris, Kurds, Ahwazis and Balouchis, families and clans sprawl across international borders and thrive on a cross-border economy, much of it based on smuggling. (Please note that the Azeri , kurd , lur , qashqai , arab , balouch , turkmen and rashti don't comprise just 49 percent of iran's population , they are 99 percent of freaking iran !)
The significance of this geography should be obvious, especially given the growing politicization of Iran’s minorities. Put simply, Iran’s minorities pose a geopolitical threat to the very existence of the Islamic regime, a threat the regime recognizes and attempts to mitigate through a mixture of co-option and force.
This is not because the regime is Persian or Iranian nationalist: it is not. On the contrary, the ruling Shiite Islamic clerics have banned traditional pre-Islamic names for children, and when they first seized power, sought to eliminate Now Rouz celebrations, a pre-Islamic rite of spring shared by most Iranians as well as some of their neighbors, notably Azerbaijanis. And while former leaders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) such as Mohsen Rezai and Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf have tried unsuccessfully to appropriate Iranian nationalism for political gains, Iranians never forget the response Ayatollah Khomeini gave to a reporter in January 1979 when asked what he felt about returning to Tehran from exile. “Hichi,” Khomeini said. “Nothing.”
Some of Iran’s minorities are well integrated. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Moussavi, for example, are both Azeris, a Turkic people that populates huge swathes of territory all the way from Azerbaijan in the northwest to Mashad, on the border with Afghanistan. Azeris have been among the most fanatical Shiite supporters of the current regime.
Tribes such as the Bakhtiaris, Lurs, and Qashqais, in western and southern Iran, have produced prime ministers and generals. Linguist Don Stillo, writing in the Encyclopaedia Iranica, considers the Lur dialect to have derived directly from Old and Middle Persian, and the Lur people to be descendents of the aboriginal Iranian tribes, driven into the mountains by Arab invaders.
But other large minorities, especially the Kurds and the Balouchis – have been repressed by Tehran-centric governments for generations. In this, the Islamic Republic has not distinguished itself from its predecessor.
What’s new is the extent to which Iran’s ethnic and religious minorities have succeeded in organizing themselves politically, and in voicing their grievances to international bodies, including the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Iran, who for several years has included sections on ethnic and religious minorities in his twice-yearly reports.
I can recall having dinner with Abdul Rahman Qassemlou in the mid-1980s in Paris, and quizzing him on the war the Islamic regime waged on his followers in the very early days of the revolution after he demanded autonomy for Iranian Kurdistan.
“We tried to call a council of minorities, to see if other ethnic groups would back our struggle,” he said. “Only two of us came, and both of us were Kurds.”
The other Kurd who attended that 1979 meeting was Rahman Haj Ahmadi, a Qassemlou ally who later helped create the Free Life Party of Iranian Kurdistan, PJAK. “Today if we called such a meeting, groups from all over Iran would come,” he told me.
Qassemlou and his Kurdish Democratic Party initially fought alone against the new Islamic regime. But within a year he was joined by dissidents of all political stripes and ethnic backgrounds, who sought refuge in Kurdistan from the regime or safe passage into exile.
Among the most prominent of these internal exiles was Darioush Forouhar, the leader of the nationalist Iran Nation’s Party (INP). After joining the first revolutionary government of Mehdi Bazargan as minister of labor, Forouhar fled Tehran to Kurdistan when Khomeini imposed absolute clerical rule. It was this hitherto unknown politico-religious doctrine, known as the velayat-e-faqih, which transformed the anti-Shah rebellion into a theocracy. Rejection of the velayat-e-faqih subsequently provided the glue for the anti-regime forces, including Iran’s ethnic minorities.
On February 19, 2005, leaders of major ethnic organizations convened in London to form a Congress of Iranian Nationalities for a Federal Iran. Seven organizations, representing Balouchis, Azeris, Kurds, Ahwazis, and Turkmens signed on. Today, twelve organizations belong to the Congress.
In its charter, the group staked out the grievances held in common by the non-Persian Iranian peoples. They denounced the “totalitarian, anti-democratic” nature of the regime, and demanded “the separation of religion and state.” They also demanded equal treatment under the law of all Iranian citizens, without regard to gender, ethnic, or religious identity.
As many as 70 percent of Iranian children grow up in households speaking a mother tongue other than Persian and do not successfully learn Persian after their first year in school, Education Minister Hamid Reza Haji Babai noted in a November 2009 seminar. Despite this, the regime until very recently forbade schools to teach minority languages – with the exception of Arabic, required for Islamic studies.
Poverty is widespread in minority provinces, as the government steers development funds and industrialization projects to more politically reliable areas. For example, 76 percent of the Balouch population in Sistan-va-Balouchistan province “live in extreme poverty,” according to Balouchi activist, Nasser Bolodai, a spokesman for the Congress of Nationalities. In Arab Khuzestan (bordering Iraq), Bolodai believes “the unemployment rate in the province’s Persian majority city of Dezful is 7 percent whereas in the Arab majority cities of Abadan and Mohammerah [Khorramshahr] the rates are 41 percent and 60 percent respectively.”
Low level insurgencies have been simmering in the Balouchi and Kurdish areas of Iran for decades, marked by regular skirmishes between IRGC troops and individuals or groups the regime labels “bandits,” “drug traffickers,” “smugglers” or “terrorists.”
In recent years, the non-violent political struggle in these outlying provinces has intensified as well. International human rights organizations as well as the United Nations Rapporteur for Human Rights in Iran regularly report the execution of political activists. The U.S.-based Boroumand Foundation found that Iran topped the world for executions per capita in 2015 with 1084 instances of capital punishment, many of them imposed on human rights activists. On Feb. 24, 2016, Shahindokht Moalverdi, the regime’s vice president for Women and Family Affairs, acknowledged that regime agents had executed the entire male population of a village in Sistan-va-Balouchistan province, on allegations of drug trafficking.
In its response to the latest UN human rights report in October 2016, the regime rejected accusations it was arbitrarily arresting or abusing human rights activists. “Unfortunately, referring to them as human rights defenders is done carelessly and negligently, to the extent that in some cases terrorists are also being called defenders of human rights,” the unsigned reply stated.
The discrimination extends to religious minorities, in particular to former Muslims who have embraced Christianity, Baha’is, Zoroastrians, Sunni and Sufi Muslims. (The overwhelming majority of Iran’s Jewish population, dating from the Babylonian captivity, fled Iran for Israel, Europe and the United States in the years immediately following the revolution, as have many Assyrian and Armenian Christians).
The Islamic Republic’s constitution imposes a religious test on candidates for government jobs known as “Gozinesh,” which requires them to declare their allegiance to the velayat-e faqih, a concept totally alien not just to Baha’is, Christians and Jews, but also to Sunni and Sufi Muslims. “The use of this practice effectively excludes the majority of Balouch, Turkmen and Kurds from employment within the government and, in some cases, within the private sector. Some applicants to universities are also subjected to Gozinesh,” Bolodai writes.
Baha’is and members of many other non-recognized religions are forbidden to enter colleges and from having their own private colleges or even home schooling their children. According to Ahmed Shaheed, the outgoing UN Rapporteur for Human Rights in Iran, persecution of Baha’is because of their faith goes beyond arbitrary arrests, detention, and prosecutions, to their very existence as citizens. Regime policies “restrict the types of businesses and jobs Baha’i citizens can have, support the closing of Baha’i-owned businesses, place pressure on business owners to dismiss Baha’i employees and call for seizure of their businesses and property,” Shaheed wrote in an October 2016 report.
In its 2005 charter, the Congress of Nationalities announced as its goal a “federal system of government on the basis of national ethnicity and geography in a united and integral Iran.”
The fundamentalist Shiite Muslim regime in Tehran has long feared ethnic strife. And while it consistently accuses groups such as PJAK, the KDPI, or the Congress of Nationalities of “separatism” – that is, seeking to break Iran into small, ethnic mini-states – its real fear is that the political demands of these groups could ignite nationwide protests that would spell the end of the clerical dictatorship.
Mustapha Hijri, the secretary general of the KDPI, came to Washington, DC in May 2011 to promote the agenda of the Congress of Nationalities, and met with me for several hours at my house. “We want ethnic federalism,” he said. “This is not separatism. We want federalism based on ethnicity and geography, not just the regions or provinces.”
Why was that distinction so important? “The current provincial lines in Iran were drawn by Tehran to prevent minorities from having a majority,” he argued. For example, Kurds are split among four provinces in northwestern Iran. He wanted to redraw the map to create “ethnically pure provinces.”
Hijri’s vision sounds like separatism to many Iranian nationalists. But it was also rejected by former KDPI member Rahman Haj Ahmadi, the secretary general of the rival Kurdish group, PJAK, who feared it could set off inter-ethnic wars between Kurds and Azeris
In an interview in Stockholm on Aug. 4, 2011, which is available on the iran.org website, Ahmadi rejected the idea of creating ethnic enclaves. “We want no internal borders inside a democratic Iran. We call our option, ‘democratic confederation.’ We believe Iran should be a bit like Europe, where different cultures live together in harmony within the European Union, while maintaining their cultural identities. We believe in a single, united, confederal Iran,” he told me.
He contrasted his idea to ethnic or geographic federalism, which implies exactly the type of split into ethnic mini-states that Iranian nationalists and the Islamic regime accuse the minorities of seeking.
“A confederation has no borders. We do not aim to destroy Iran, but to keep it as it is and transform it into a democratic system that respects the identity and the rights of every citizen. I am a Kurd, born of a Kurdish mother. But I live in Iran. Iran is a country of many ethnicities. We want all of them to feel they have equal rights as Iranians.”
Since these conciliatory remarks, much has happened to polarize Iran’s minorities and enflame those calling for outright separation from the Tehran-centric Islamic state.
Probably the most significant event was the January 2015 liberation of Kobane, a Kurdish city that straddles the Syrian border with Turkey, by Kurdish militias including PJAK and the PKK, which Turkey and the Obama administration consider to be terrorist groups.
The United States openly supported the pro-PKK militias during the prolonged battle, providing intelligence, weapons, and even air strikes against ISIS positions. The willingness of the Obama administration to disregard the hysterical demands from Ankara that the United States leave the Kurds to die emboldened Kurdish groups throughout the region.
Following the victory in Kobane, the president of the Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq, Mustapha Barzani, announced plans in February 2016 to hold a referendum on the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan. Under intense pressure from Ankara and Baghdad, Barzani agreed in October 2016 to suspend the referendum until after the liberation of Mosul.
The KDPI, which had abandoned the armed struggle in 1996 and reportedly cooperated with the Iranian regime against its political rival, PJAK, announced in March 2016 it was sending peshmerga fighters into Iran. Clashes between KDPI fighters and the IRGC began on April 19, 2016, when a KDPI peshmerga unit attacked government security forces in Sanandaj, the capital of Iranian Kurdistan. Since then, PJAK, too, has resumed armed attacks against the IRGC, which it had suspended in 2011. Also joining the fight were military units of the Kurdistan Freedom Party commanded by Hussein Yazdanpanah, a well-respected guerilla leader.
One theory currently being discussed by Kurdish observers in the region is that the KRG encouraged the Iranian Kurds to step up armed actions against the IRGC, to prevent the Iranians from invading northern Iraq in the event the KRG declares its independence.
Today’s Iran is a rich stew of ethnic minorities. Not only do the minorities control Iran’s borders with the outside world, they almost universally despise the Shiite Persian center. The Green Movement of 2009 failed because its predominantly Persian, Tehran-based leaders failed to reach out to minorities who are natural sympathizers of any pro-freedom movement. While many Azeris and Kurds were arrested during the anti-regime demonstrations, the Green Movement leaders failed to articulate a vision for a secular, democratic Iran that respected the cultural, linguistic and political rights of minorities.
The key to Iran’s future could well lie with these groups. If they remain isolated, weak, and cut off from each other and from the outside world, the clerical regime can survive. But if they join forces with each other and with Iranian nationalists around a vision of a secular, democratic Iran, they could burst the iron hoops of the Revolutionary Guards and the intelligence services with a quickness and force that would surprise not just the regime, but the world.
The question becomes whether these groups, and their Persian counterparts, can articulate an Iranian identity that is more powerful than the ethnic or religious identities that currently divide them.
Iran: More than Persia
By
Brenda Shaffer
December 16, 2013
When Iranian President Hassan Rouhani was campaigning, he promised the country’s many ethnic minorities to expand the use of their languages. Rouhani recently signaled his intent to keep that promise, by appointing Iran’s first presidential aid for ethnic and religious minority affairs, acknowledging the country’s minority challenges.
In the multi-ethnic state that is Iran, the political meaning of the population’s diversity will have serious consequences as political normalization with the West continues. Both the United States and the European Union should understand the significance of Iran’s multi-ethnic makeup and prepare policies that can address it.
Washington and Brussels should view this process as similar to when Mikhail Gorbachev began opening the Soviet Union to the West, it quickly became apparent that the Soviet Union was –not only composed of Russians. Later, it became clear that what the West had considered to be “Yugoslavians” or “Czechoslovakians” were, in fact, many different ethnic groups. Few of these peoples shared a civic-state identity.
In the same way, while Iran is commonly referred to as Persia, Persians account for roughly half the population. The remaining half is comprised of ethnic minorities; mainly Azerbaijanis, Kurds, Turkmen, Arabs and Baluch.
The Azerbaijanis are the largest minority, accounting for a third of the population. Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei is an ethnic Azerbaijani, as is one of the main opposition leaders, Mir-Hossein Mousavi.
Ethnic minorities pose a particular security problem for Iran. They primarily live in the border regions and many share ties with members of their ethnic communities in neighboring states, including Azerbaijan, Turkey, Iraq and Pakistan. Iran’s domestic makeup affects its foreign relations with most of its neighbors.
Iran’s Constitution grants ethnic minorities the right to use their ethnic languages in media and other publications, as well as for education. In reality, however, Iran has not allowed ethnic minorities to run schools or give testimony in courts in their native languages. Non-Persian media and publications have been limited.
The multi-ethnic composition of Iran could affect regime stability. In a potential regime crisis, the ethnic factor could play a role in toppling the government — as it did in the collapse of the Shah regime and the ascent to power of the Islamic Republic in 1979.
Yet, in contrast to the role that ethnic populations played in bringing about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the breakup of Yugoslavia, Iran’s multi-ethnic demographics may undermine the reform movement. Many pro-democracy Persian activists in Iran fear full democratization because it could lead to the end of Persian dominance.
Iran’s ethnic minorities demonstrate varying degrees of identification with the regime. Most seek expansion of their cultural rights within Iran. In this, they are seeking to change the nation’s policies, not its borders.
However, some groups, including Kurds and Baluch, are now waging a violent struggle against Tehran. The Western media does not often focus on these ethnic struggles. When they do it is usually framed in religious terms,
referring to Sunni minorities and ignoring the ethnic basis of the conflict.
Regular skirmishes now take place between government forces and residents of Iran’s Kurdish provinces. Hundreds of Iranian Kurds have been arrested in the last year and many are still in detention.
Another focus of violent confrontation is between Tehran and the Baluch-populated regions that border Pakistan and Afghanistan. Senior Iranian security and other government personnel have been assassinated in this region; most recently a public prosecutor.
Responding to these ethnic upheavals, Tehran has long blamed outsiders. Rouhani has
done this as well, attempting to delegitimize the demands for language and cultural rights by depicting these ethnic minorities as tools of foreign governments, primarily Britain, the United States or Israel.
Most foreign governments, however, including the United States, have not formulated specific policies toward the ethnic minorities. They rarely even factor them in when assessing regime stability, and are cautious in their contacts with representatives of the ethnic minorities who seek outside support.
In fact, even U.S. government-supported media outlets like Voice of America and Radio Liberty rarely report on the discrimination against Iran’s ethnic minorities or the violent confrontations taking place with the central government.
Though actively meddling in Iran’s ethnic politics does not seem prudent, the Washington and European governments should include Tehran’s discrimination toward its ethnic minorities when reporting on the state of human rights there. U.S. government analytical units and officials dealing with Iran should consider the response of ethnic minorities when assessing regime stability in Iran.
Moreover, Radio Liberty and other U.S. government-supported media outlets should give a voice to these ethnic minorities.
The rising ethnic activity in Iran will likely lead to increased demands for policy responses from the United States and Europe. These governments should be prepared. It is best not to wait until people are marching in public squares to understand their aspirations.
PHOTO: An Iranian Sunni Kurd woman sits at the Jame Mosque in the city of Sanandaj in Kordistan province, 763 km (477 miles) northwest of Tehran, May 10, 2011. REUTERS/Morteza Nikoubazl
« Previous Post
China’s air defense zone: The shape of things to come?
Next Post »
Danger and delay on dirty bombs
http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Dec 16, 2013
2:10 pm UTC
It’s amazing that so many of Iran’s leaders are actually ethnically Azerbaijani, considering that Azerbaijan itself is very pro-western and in constant conflict with Iran.
It raises the question of whether policy assessments dealing with rival states should focus on the ruling elite and consider it as “the nation”, or whether it should pay attention to the different ethnicities and sub-cultures in the country even when they have no power. I doubt that in pre-spring Syria anyone gave attention to the fact that Assad and his ruling elite were Alawit, a sect that is pretty much considered to be infidels by the rest of the Muslim world, including the Sunni majority in Syria. They definitely pay attention to it now…
Posted by E-Ret |
Report as abusive
Dec 16, 2013
5:53 pm UTC
Our modern era of politics, international relations, and even the cold war starts with South Azerbaijan.
One of the first issues discussed in the League of Nations (LN), and then UN was the issue of South Azerbaijan. Even though Iranian Islamist Terrorist regime wouldn’t acknowledge overtly,at the heart of the world’s politics, South Azerbaijan is still able to effect and or change the region’s and world’s statues quo. South Azerbaijan is able and intends to change the artificial borders of so called Iran, creating an independent, modern, and democratic nation state.
South Azerbaijani Turks ruled their own and neighbouring nations for thousands of years. Their just governance over Persians, Armenians, Georgians, Arabs, Indians, Kurds and other peoples of the region is embedded and told in the literature and culture of the region. As long as history can remember, under South Azerbaijani Turks all people were equal and treated as such. Their religion, culture, language, traditions, and integrity were respected and in most cases promoted. There is no single case of forcible assimilation to any language or religion in the region ruled by South Azerbaijani Turks. Christians, Jews, and Muslims, lived side by side under Gaznavids, Saljuks, Safavids, Afshars, Qajars, and many other Turkish empires, regional, or local governments for thousands of years. Under South Azerbaijani rules no language banned. All languages were protected and promoted. This was the norm for millenniums in the region up until 1920s.
Colonial powers of the time preferred to eliminate Turkish rules over the area now called Iran, bringing to power some illiterate Persian mad man called Reza Pahlavi.
SAIPThis brought to en end the great Turkish Qajar empire. Unfortunately after the collapse of Qajar empire in 1923 and instalment of Reza Pahlavi by foreign powers to the crown, the situation changed drastically. A very tolerant Qajar system gave way to a despotic, narrow minded, racist regime with the fever of Aryan melancholy. Reza Pahlavi who was uneducated and illiterate himself, hired many intellectuals to fabricate “a one language, one religion” country of so called Iran. Reza Pahlavi and his son Mohammad Reza Pahlavi were successful in creating such a country with the blessing of major world powers, billions of dollars of revenues from oil, and of course with the fear created by major massacres of thousands of South Azerbaijani Turks in the course of 57 years of Pahlavi rule. Under Reza Pahlavi’s Iran, everybody was considered of a pure Aryan race and anybody claimed otherwise would be branded as remnants of previous invaders to the glorious land of Cyrus The Great! Many paid foreign and domestic orientalists, many paid learned university professors, and so called intellectuals were in accord with the Persification of Iran. Every so called branded Iranian was considered direct descendent of great and glorious kings of supposedly pre-Islamic times. Of course oil dollars would buy or suppress any conscious person in the world. But when Reza Pahlavi went too far, and his regime was aligning with Aryan Nazis of Germany, he was deposed and exiled by the same powers who brought him to power and died in misery in Durban, South Africa.
We remember him for his ignorance, his despotism, his anti-Azerbaijanism and his anti-Turkism. Long gone was the devil, and South Azerbaijani Turks were using the opportunity to group under “Azerbaijani Democratic Party” to regain their self determination. 1945 witnessed South Azerbaijanis creating their own state again, an state with full human rights record, and full compatibility with the world’s democratic and modern countries of even present time. Women were free to vote and be voted. Education in the mother tongue of South Azerbaijani Turkish were free to everyone. Attempts were made to construct roads, bridges and buildings after over twenty years of Pahlavi destruction of South Azerbaijan. After one year of construction and rejuvenation of South Azerbaijan, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi who was installed in Tehran as a king of the kings, decided to invade South Azerbaijan. The Iranian regime with the green light from Soviet’s Stalin and blessings of the world’s power invaded South Azerbaijan. Based on independent eye witnesses thousands and thousands of innocent people were massacred. Farm lands were burned, people’s houses were plundered, women were raped, and men were killed. Persian army knew no limit in barbarism committed in South Azerbaijan. In 1946, the world watched the Persian army rape South Azerbaijan.
Remembering Short-lived Government of South Azerbaijan, 1945-1946,Persian army had free hand in creating the state of horror in cities and villages of our motherland. For over 10 years Shah’s army and secret services prosecuted South Azerbaijani Turks at will. Kidnappings, exiling, tortures, and killings were common tools of oppression Persian regime applied on our people. Estimated 35,000 people were killed in first few weeks of the occupation. Following days, months and years were worse. Thousand of children, women and elderly died on the way to exile to southern deserts of Iran. Only after his majesty were satisfied with the complete suppression of South Azerbaijani movement, he issued a declaration of public amnesty. The state of fear and oppression continued until 1979 revolution which ousted Pahlavi regime and replaced it with a theocratic terrorist regime of mollas. The so called revolution of 1979 were aborted by abrupt coming to power of mollas.
Only the administration changed, leaving the system intact. All projects of assimilation, depopulation, de-Turkisation, and destruction of South Azerbaijan were followed by Islamic regime. Oppressions were increased, population doubled, and poverty is hundred time worse than before. South Azerbaijan was further disassembled, and name of Azerbaijan was taken from many areas with the pretext of creating new provinces. Names of cities, rivers, roads, mountains, and people were changed by force to some meaningless Persian names. Iranian terrorist regime’s pursue of nuclear arsenal only will be used as a deterrence for world community not to question the atrocities committed by them inside the prison called Iran. Islamic regimes extended fist of terror, and barbaric shout of “ death to America, death to Israel, death to England” should not be seen as the attitude of so called “Iranians”.
There is no such a thing as “Iranians”. There are South Azerbaijani Turks, and millions of other non-Persians, and then their is a Persian-Shia terrorist government of Iran. Iran’s terrorism has extended it’s hand to neighbouring countries and all over the world. In the last 33 years Iranian terrorists had kidnapped and killed hundreds of people around the world. Many opposition figures were assassinated by Iran’s terrorists all around the world. South Azerbaijani members also were among the terror targets recently. Iran is a prison of peoples. Non-Persians are running the game, and others are forced to be Persianized. Backed by army of terror, torture, killing, exiling, and many other ways of intimidation, and humiliation, backed by oil dollars, and world power’s blessings, the uniformation and Persification of the country called Iran, is being realized in the last 80 years. Iranian opposition can afford to talk about human rights in Iran. US can afford to talk about nuclear issues with Iran. But, for us, the South Azerbaijani Turks, the issue is our very being as a nation with our own identity.
Our issue is, our undeniable right to govern ourselves. Our problem is not in Iran. Our problem is with Iran, which is occupying our land, South Azerbaijan, and destroying our people, Turks. Yes, we can and we should talk about human rights in every case and everywhere, but the sensitive issue here is our people’s right, the national rights. This is the issue that is of importance and preference for us. National independence, and national identity for South Azerbaijani Turk, is the vital issue here.
To discuss human rights in Iran, is to ignore genocide of South Azerbaijani Turks in every aspect of human and national life. The lessons of short-lived government of South Azerbaijan under prime minister Pishevari, is too great to ignore. Now, we realize that, our problem is Iran, not in Iran. The most elementary, urgent and vital necessity for us, is Independence of South Azerbaijan, which is the basic tenet of South Azerbaijani Independence Party (SAIP).
We ask the world community to distinguish the facts of political and ethnological diversity in so called Iran. Let it be known that South Azerbaijani Turks don’t share any of this terrorist regimes political views. Let the world know that we have only one enemy and that is “Islamic Republic of Iran”. Our enemy don’t reside very far from us. They are our motherland’s invaders. Persian racism, Persian despotism is our enemy. We will live and fight forever to defeat Persian racism, and end Iranian occupation of South Azerbaijan.
Now, after over 80 years of losing her sovereignty, South Azerbaijan is still under foreign occupation. South Azerbaijani Turk is deprived of his/her basic human and national rights such as education in own language, work, and live in own land with own culture. South Azerbaijan needs attention of all freedom loving people in the world. South Azerbaijani Turks need all democratic non-governmental organizations and governments to hear our cry of independence, freedom and democracy. In every country in the world, we extend our hand for help to get recognized as a people under occupation of Iran, and to expose the situation of South Azerbaijan under Iranian despotism.
Long Live South Azerbaijan,
Oguz Turk
Posted by oguzturk |
Report as abusive
Dec 16, 2013
6:50 pm UTC
“Iran’s multi-ethnic demographics may undermine the reform movement. Many pro-democracy Persian activists in Iran fear full democratization because it could lead to the end of Persian dominance.”
Eh, so it’s similar to how whites in South Africa rejected democracy for so long because they feared it would lead to an end to white dominance? Also, how can someone be in favor of democracy but not in favor of “full democracy”? If a “democracy” is not full democracy, then is it democracy to begin with?
Posted by delta5297 |
Report as abusive
Dec 16, 2013
7:37 pm UTC
@delta5297
I don’t see how the apartheid era in South-Africa has anything to do with this. Iranian minorities have the same rights and adhere to the same laws as Persians. I am no fan of Iran, but not everything is “apartheid”. Some countries have large minorities in them (and some of them are sometimes potential security threats) and the country has to deal with that somehow. Democracy seems to be the best way, but democracy is just a form of governance. If there is a democracy without a liberal and plural base of values and ethics behind it than democracy just leads to the tyranny of the majority. Surprisingly, I think the Iranian people actually do have a pluralistic base (unlike other countries in the area that experienced a “spring” which quickly turned into a “winter”). I think Iran actually has a potential of becoming a real democracy one day.
Posted by E-Ret |
Report as abusive
Dec 16, 2013
8:52 pm UTC
OK here is my beef with this article not a single mention of Zorastrians and their importance to “Persia”, the original peaceful inhabitant of this country. Currently a miniscule minority living in Iran, India and Pakistan, a recorded population of approx. 100,000 that’s it.
Iranians of recent have been taking pride in their heritage and openly saying how proud they are of being of Zorastrian heritage. This due to fact that the younger generation cannot associate themselves with this dreaded theocracy.
Posted by politicaljunkie |
Report as abusive
Dec 16, 2013
12:28 am UTC
The writer is the author of “energy politics”. That says it all. The Supreme leader is Azerbaijani(or Azeri), a minority group, the author says but she still went on to say minorities are discriminated against. Wasn’t the actual Azerbaijan part of today’s Iran? Azerbijan is Persian. Period.
This article is related to a small country of about 7 million people in that region working hard(through various authors of “energy politics”) to break up countries in that region into pieces to bring them down to its size of about 8000 square miles.
Posted by Fromkin |
Report as abusive
Dec 16, 2013
1:28 am UTC
The author of this article is either completely ignorant about history of make of Iran (by comparing it to the Soviet Union) or is purposefully promoting the so called “big middle-east project” conceptualized by the neo-crazies (mainly focused on breaking-up Iran along its ethnic lines). It is a shameless effort of “divide and concur.” But the underlying reasoning is as stupid as it can be. Iran is not a Soviet Union – which was basically made up of the nations concurred by Russia’s expansionist policies of the last couple of centuries. Azaris (I am one of them) and Azarbaijan have always been one of the core ingredients of Iran’s history and culture. Almost all the Iranian dynasties – since advent of Islam – have been of Turkish (or Azari) origin. There can be no comparison between Iran and Yugoslavia or Soviet Union. We Azaries (with the exception of a small minority who might think otherwise) ARE Iranian. Period!
Yes! We do have our problems. But they are our; not yours. So my dear pan-turkists and neo-crazies: stop dreaming.
Posted by BijanB |
Report as abusive
Dec 16, 2013
4:01 am UTC
The United States, England and Canada are multi-ethnic societies. should any other nation dealing with USA consider the ethnic makeup of our society.
Posted by MichaelSedezh |
Report as abusive
Dec 17, 2013
9:10 am UTC
I am so fed up with such articles and double standards of Western reporters (look up independent journalism in the dictionary).
In Turkey (NATO country) Kurds (14 million of them) have no schools and are prosecuted for usage of Kurdish, etc. It is a clear apartheid system. Have you ever listened about it ?
Posted by Wantunbiasednew |
Report as abusive
Dec 17, 2013
5:37 pm UTC
This is a great article. It is well-balanced and most of the criticism is unfounded. Ethnic and religious minorities make up about half of Iran’s population. Without democracy for them there cannot be a meaningful democracy in Iran and it will only be a partial democracy at best. It is good the new president has a special advisor on rights of ethnic groups. This raises issues of ethnic and religious minorities to a higher level of importance. However, so far there has been mostly talking and less action. For example education in mother tongue remains a major demand of all ethnic groups and the government has not done anything about it. Also execution of ethnic rights activists has continued.
Posted by Chapar |
Report as abusive
Dec 17, 2013
6:51 pm UTC
The ethnic minorities participation in the government, in the distribution of power in Iran is very limited. The government, in its essence, is a domination of the Persian minority over multi-ethnic Iran. Although the government officials claim that it does not discriminate against other ethnicities in the government, the evidence shows otherwise. There is an unwritten law preventing none-Persian ethnic figures such as Azeri Turks, Ahvazi Arabs, Kurds, Baloch and others from running for the president, holding the other top two government positions – speaker of the Parliament and the Chief Justice. All these position holders must be an ethnic Persian. During the past 34 years all top leadership of the country, including two Supreme Leaders and six Presidents of Iran, have been ethnic Persians. It comes as a no surprise that eight current presidential nominees are also Persian.
In addition, there are appointed Persian nationals mostly from Tehran and Isfahan as heads of local administrative offices to the regions with dominant non-Persian population to ensure the direct control of the Persian-led Iranian government over those regions. Ironically, Persian opposition inside and in exile alike, support this racist policy of the current Iranian regime due to their own nationalist agenda.
Both Persian factions in Tehran are trying to silence the ethnic minorities. And then, there are invented political misconceptions, like the one which claims the Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is an ethnic Azeri. The fact-check about Ali Khamenei’s ethnic background, clearly described in Khamenei’s own auto-biography, shows otherwise. Based on his family tree, Ali Khamenei’s ancestors trace back to Shia Imam Ali in Najaf city. His great grandfather Seyyed Mohammad from Tafresh City in central Iran moved to the South Azerbaijani village of Khamene and settled there for a few years as an Islamic missionary or “Mobalegh-Saadat’. It was during that period which Seyyed Hossein (the grand father of Ali Khamenei) was born in Khamene Village and raised in Najaf city. They called him Khamenei, which meant that he was from Khamene. Ali Khmenei’s father Syyed Javad was born in Najaf city but raised in Persian city of Mashhad. His mother was also a Persian from Mashhad. His real name is Seyyed Ali Hosseini (Khamenei) born and raised in Persian family in Mashhad and married to Persian wife. He is an ethnic Persian, fluent in Arabic and he also speaks Azeri Turkish.
Ali Khamenei himself has never claimed to be an Azeri Turk. The reason for repeating this propaganda line by the regime’s media and the Persian opposition is to cover up the regime’s racist policy of exclusion of the ethnic minorities from the government. Khamenei also happens to serve as a perfect scapegoat for Iran’s ultra-nationalist Persian groups to place the blame for the backwardness of the regime on an alleged non-Persian.
Of course, certain individuals can always find their way into the ruling elite and some Azeris have done so. Most of them are completely assimilated and recognize themselves as ethnic Persians.
Similar to the Saddam era Iraq and current minority regime in Syria, the ethnic Persian minority in Iran are holding power and marginalizing itself due to the policies aimed at ignoring other ethnicities living in Iran, including the Azeri Turks of over 40%, Kurds 7%, Arabs 6%, Lurs 5%, Baloch 3%, Gilak-Mazandarani 4%, Turkmen 3%, Qashqai 2% and others in favor of the 30% of Iran’s populations – ethnic Persians.
Posted by AAlex |
Report as abusive
Dec 17, 2013
8:12 pm UTC
Since the invasion of the western Baluchistan in 1928 political movements have always existed and resisted the Persian occupation of the western Baluchistan. The Baluch National has resisted the Persian occupation and has demanded National self determination on the bases of universal principle of the right to national self determination and national hood. Nationalism has become vocal type of national identity.
The Persian elite came to define themselves as an Aryan against their Arab, Azari(Turk) , the Baluch and the others ethnic groups. The Persian elite sponsored state nationalism is dead. The state sponsored nationalism was killed by the Shiite revolutionary in pursue of universal Shiite glory. The Persian elite had made Iranian nationalism for themselves.
Iran survive only if the majority of Iranian population think of themselves as Iranian and votes by their foots. But the reality is different, the Iranian has been oppressed for nearly a century and the ethnic conflict in Iran is a time bomb waiting to burst and no one is sure of its consequences. The Arab, Baluch, Kurd and some Azari-Turk ceased to think of themselves as Iranian. Iran does not exist in their mind. They think of themselves as Baluch, Arab, Kurd, Azari and see the future within themselves an an independence Nation. The ethnic rivalries have already started between Persian and Azari the two dominant populous ethnic groups in Iran.
Posted by Sarjov |
Report as abusive
Dec 17, 2013
8:20 pm UTC
the ethnic conflict in Iran is a time bomb waiting to burst and no one is sure of its consequences.
Posted by Sarjov |
Report as abusive
Dec 18, 2013
4:23 pm UTC
Let’s hope that the US can restrain itself from stirring up trouble amongst minorities in Iran. Does the US always need to be so immoral, that it does anything to cause trouble to its competitors? Are there no moral limits for the US?
Iranian nuclear scientists are assassinated. Iranian police are murdered by dissatisfied groups. It is quite clear who is benefiting from, and who to be suspicious has caused these events. Let us take the high road, and not be ready to assassinate people throughout the world!
Posted by xcanada2 |
Report as abusive
Dec 18, 2013
8:56 pm UTC
The biggest problem facing Iran ,aside from economical one, is the issue of ethnicity that can turn into a serious and deadly conflict.A country divided on ethnic and national lines is in need of a serious dialogue in order to solve these issues but it is the forces of Persian chauvinism that has prevented such dialogue so far.
Throughout last hundred years the Persians and the Persian authorities have developed a mentality where everything in the country had to be, with or without force, Persianized and this particular policy was directed against the Arabs and Turks in a more robust way than against others since in particular the Arabs and Turks not only are ethnically different but racialy( Arabs are Semitic) as well.
The best example of this new apartheid can be seen in the province of KHUZISTAN or Arabistan where the Arab minority living in one of the richest parts of the world are the poorest and the most oppressed of all. This is an area where national humiliation, cultural suppression and low living standards is very common and the lives of these people can easily be compared to lives of those in Sowetto during the apartheid era in former south Africa.
Lately the Persian regime has embarked on creating one of the most devastating assault on the Arab life by creating 4 high dams on sources of karoon river and thus creating a gigantic environmental catastrophe for Arab people who live along the banks of karoon. The waters are transferred to Persian living areas of Isfahan, Qom, Rafsanjan and Yazd, The width of the karoon river before this project was 2 miles and It now has shrunk to less than 300 feet in most areas and great part of that ancient river is now dried and turned into dust.
IMHO the Persian people and the Persian authorities need to refrain from accusing the ethnic minorities of separatism and instead embark on starting a dialogue where all people can be treated as equal citizens .
The Persians will be digging their own and Iran’s grave by continuing the current racist policies and it is in their and the country’s best interest to give up and dismantle the rabid ethnic fascism that has a had a grip on the country for the last 100 years.
Posted by jamalx |
Report as abusive
Dec 20, 2013
2:36 am UTC
The Azerbaijani Turks, Kurds, Arabs, Baluches, Turkmens, Lors issues are not popular subjects, in Iranian/Persian community.
Because since the establishment of Pahlavi dynasty [in 1925, after the fall of the Qajar dynasty] non-Persians have been treated as second-class citizens and there have always been a lack of political and individual rights for them. There is deep and wide racism against non-Persian ethnic groups. They are subjected to racism and discrimination by not only the Iranian government but also by the Persian society.
So it’s not surprising Persian media doesn’t cover the issue, and if they do they represent the government’s point of view.
In August 2010, the UN anti-racism panel called on Iran to counter racism and ethnic discrimination, including incitement to hatred by officials and “double discrimination suffered by women from minorities.
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed concern at the exclusion of Arab, Azeri, Balochi, Kurdish and Bahai communities in areas such as housing, education, health, jobs and “from public life”.
Posted by nimasardari |
Report as abusive
Dec 22, 2013
7:51 pm UTC
Brenda Shaffer – Awesome – forward thinking, when are you running for office?
Posted by 2Borknot2B |
Report as abusive
Dec 22, 2013
8:08 pm UTC
Posted by jamalx: “The Persian regime has embarked on creating one of the most devastating assault on the Arab life by creating 4 high dams on sources of karoon river and thus creating a gigantic environmental catastrophe for Arab people who live along the banks of karoon. The waters are transferred to Persian living areas of Isfahan, Qom, Rafsanjan and Yazd, The width of the karoon river before this project was 2 miles and It now has shrunk to less than 300 feet in most areas and great part of that ancient river is now dried and turned into dust.” The rectification will be astounding. New ocean to ocean water way perhaps?
Posted by 2Borknot2B |
Report as abusive
Mar 6, 2014
6:46 am UTC
peopleplease be aware of PAN IRANISM FASCISM which is initially founded by the PAHLAVI regime whom changed the name of the “QAJAR TURKIC KINGDOME” to IRAN for the sake of their propaganda supported by some concurrent European policies. all they try to do to destroy the historic back ground of the non persian ethnic groups (specially the Turks whom used to compose at least half of the area’s population but now are assimilated and reduced to around 25%) and assimilate them while buying a white!! history for Persians who were originally the reform ofancient Ilamits while Elamits themselves were a branch of Dravidians. Pan Iranism did not end by the fall ofPahlavi regime because it is supported by those who consider themselves as Persians. Iranian supreme leader is an example ofsuch person who has declared in many cases that |i am not a Turk” or “the whole world should learn Farsi”!!!!
many of their agents are active through the internet and even have left comments here.
one of their conspiracies against the local Turkic people is to use the fake term “Azeri” while it means nothing. like the name IRAN its but another innovation. the term “AZERBAIJAN” is the perso-arabic reformation of the original name HAZAR BAY GAN meaning the location of the Khazar lordship. the people of the NW Iran have always been calling themselves as Turks and feel insulted through being called as anything else.
while the Khazars themselves were a sub clan of the SAKA or TUR proto Ural-Altaic nation yet the Pahlavi regime tried to put the Scythians as in the IRANIC!! category through bribing some academic staff while there had never been any specific ethnic or linguistic group called IRAN or like this. PAHLAVI (their real family name was PALAN CHI means panel sales man in Turkic) even did not know the real meaning of this term IRAN and choose it only because it is spelled similar to Aryan! (Iran means art worker in Turkic and Aryan means separator and judge and neither of these words dont have any meaning in Persian).
another goal of the Pahlavis was to fabricate a Persian speaking white ethnic nation through assimilating the Turkic people they had access over IN ORDER TO SURVIVE IN A NAZI CONTROLLED WORLD. if you study some historical references about the various Turkic people you will see that they all had been described as white people,often with red hairs. examples can be made by studying about the Scythians, Khazars, Ghirghiz, Uighur, Cuman, Pecheng, Bulgar, Avar, Alan, Tatar, Hungiar(huns), Bashqir and other Turkic clans.
Posted by Hazarbaygan |
Report as abusive
Mar 6, 2014
6:51 am UTC
be aware that the Pan Iranism still survives and is supported by both the Iranian government and the PAHLAVI institution run in US. they may do ANYTHING to shut the defying voices. currently they dream to create some thing called the “great Iran”!! and thats why they export terrorism around the middle east and are after nuclear arsenal.
Posted by Hazarbaygan |
Report as abusive
Mar 9, 2015
7:12 pm UTC
[…]
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/20 13/12/16/iran-more-than-persia/ […]
Posted by خشم رژیم از افشاگری علیه پاکسازی قومی / کریم بنیسعید عبدیان | My Blog |
Report as abusive
Feb 28, 2016
6:57 am UTC
Such a trash article ! All modern countries have a National language why should Iran be the exception? Most Azeris speak farsi and identify with being Persian. Any Iranian that wants to speak Turkish in school should move from Iran case closed .
Posted by Ghosthunter619 |
Report as abusive
