Dealings with the West and the Importing of Democracy
Aside from their disdain with perceived American imperialism, contemporary Iranians are enamored with the freedoms of the West. Iran also faces an important youth bulge that is experiencing discontent with strong economic, political, and social pressures (Larrabee 2003, p. 5). The latest generation has grown tired of draconic Shariah law and the disparity between genders. That the Majlis was witness to so many dismissals and disqualifications (more than a thousand politicians were dismissed in the last Parliamentary elections) is a testament to the growing inefficacy of the Guardian Council in dealing with its own people.
The War on Terror and America’s deposing of the Taliban regime and Hussein regime in Afghanistan and Iraq (respectively) has led many to speculate on the fate of Shi’a Iran. Iran, however, is not in immediate danger, despite America’s denunciation of Iran as part of the new axis of evil. Though many in the Guardian Council have taken advantage of the plight of many Iraqi civilians, using the American interventions as a pretext to launch nationalist rallies in support of the ruling ayatollahs. Because America and Europe have pressed for secular reforms, the existing Iranian leadership has manipulated the situation into a threat on Iran’s identity as a Shi’a state. Shi’a identity has become so closely tied with Iranian identity that many scholars speculate on resurgence in nationalist and religious fervor among students.
To counter Western impositions on Iran’s national agendas (nuclear proliferation, for example), Iran has begun dangling oil and gas contracts before China, Russia, and others, further alienating its people from countries that exude the freedoms Iranians so desperately seek (Jaw-jaw, for now, 2005 p. 47). Though the government desires to further its nuclear programs, a big reason for deferring Western trade may be to show its people that though the United States is the world’s sole superpower, they can exist as a Muslim nation without accepting American globalization. Despite Russia’s encroachment on Iran following World War II, Iran deals with it openly, perhaps because Russia has previously been willing to sell nuclear arms to Iran (Russian fuel, European carrot, American stick, 2005 p.43).
Dealing with China and Russia affords the theocracy no threat of democratization and their alienation; Iran can remain the stalwart Shi’a power it established in 1979 while still reaping the benefits of international exchange.
Minorities in Iran and Their Rights
Iran is a naturally racially diverse nation with a large Kurdish population and several ethnic minority groups such as the Azeri, Arab, Gilaki, and Mazandarani. Though the Islamic Republic is not overtly discriminative on the basis of race, the primary group most associated with disenfranchisement and subjugation is the Kurdish population. Commonly referred to as a sister race, the Kurds are linguistically close to Farsi Iranians. However, many are still denied the same rights on the basis of religion; Kurds, like other minority groups, are not all Shi’a, and some are not even Muslim.
Groups like the Baha’i, who were native Iranians but considered apostates, are persecuted for their claims to modernity in addition to pressing reforms. The Baha’i stressed the need to improve society through universal education, world peace, and the equality of the sexes, changes viewed by theocrats as overtly pro-Western (Simpson 1988, p. 214).
Other minority groups included religious groups that were of foreign birth, most notably the Anglican Christians who grew under the British occupation. Before 1979, many grew deeply worried by the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in cities such as Isfahan, knowing that it was likely to be hostile to the presence of Christians (Simpson 1988, p. 313).
Minorities, though vocally opposed to the shah’s autocracy, were first and foremost mindful of the imminent withdrawal of the imperial protection they once knew (Simpson 1988, p. 314).
Like the Arab Nationalist movement, the government views most minorities as an imposition on Iran’s developing theocracy. Historically, minorities saw no legal representation in Islamic courts unless they were converts to Shi’a Islam or recognized as People of the Book. Jews and Christians were the only protected minorities in early theocratic Iran; racial minorities such as Anglican-Iranians saw oppression from the government as well as their fellow citizens who antagonized them as remnants of Western imperialism.
Women’s Rights in Theocratic Iran
Like its Sunni counterparts, the Shi’a theocracy is notorious for its treatment of women. Observing strict adherence to Shariah laws, Iran enforces its hijab laws, requiring all women (regardless of faith) to cover their heads in traditional headscarves. While there is not room for deviance from the Shariah within the Shi’a nation, Iran’s ayatollahs often fail to observe certain fundamental tenets of Islam that favor women, namely the right to divorce and to own businesses.
Though contemporary women are more subjugated under the Persian patriarchy than during the years of the Shah, it is arguable to contend that the poor state of women’s rights in Iran is a direct result of the nationalist fervor that gripped the nation in 1979. The hijab, though traditionally required to maintain modesty, may very well be worn as a form of identification. More specifically, the general populous’ stringent dress code may serve more than just a means to appease an archaic tradition: it is just as likely to serve a nationalist end. With all women visibly clothed in hijab, the ayatollahs succeeded in forming a national, Shi’a identity. In such a society, women become living reminders of the ayatollahs’ supremacies and therefore becoming walking bulwarks to consolidate the Council’s power.
Ironically, Iranian women were strong participants in the 1979 revolution (Hughes 1998). However, the Islamic reforms instituted by the mullahs were indoctrinated with premises describing woman as a man’s possession (Hughes 1998). The status of women sharply declined, with child marriage and polygamy constantly on the rise. The so-labeled moderate President Khatami was quoted as saying one of the West’s most serious mistakes was the emancipation of women (Hughes 1988). Though Khatami seeks to raise the status of women, he still puts a cap on the level of emancipation Iranian women can fully enjoy as his aims are within the boundaries of a Shi’a theocracy. Though the use of ijtihad can be implemented in determining the ascension of women’s status in Iranian society, it is still limited as the Qur’an is a book advocating patriarchy.
Tags: identity, Iran, Iranian women, Iranians, Muslim, Taliban regime, Western imperialism
