Impressions about Iran

A sentence excerpted from Robert Fisk`s essay `savages`:

After Graham is wounded in Kabul, the Afghans - in the words of his Irish-born army doctor - have become ``murtherin villains, the black niggers``.

That is for the Pakistani chowkeys who keep referring to their light skin vis-a-vis the dark Indians

Re:HP#32

[..The issue before the US is whether a military action against Iran would sufficiently destroy the thin fabric of Iran nation and plunge Iran in to a Persian speaking versus the non Persian speaking civil war or not....]

HP, you are overestimating the depth of knowledge in the US state department or the pentagon. The US barely knew that there were shias and sunnis in Iraq who would fight after Saddam, as they imagined that they would be welcomed as liberators. I doubt if anyone in the US has any knowledge about the ethnic mix in Iran and its ramifications after a military strike.

Re: # 32

Most of the oil and natural gas is in regions inhabited by Arab minority. The Azeris, Kurds, Baluchis would lose out if they went independent. I can see the Azeris wanting to join Azerbaijan if it emerges something better than a banana republic. The Kurds face complications because of Iraq and Turkey. It looks like the Sunni Baluchis who are the most restless.

On second thoughts, my comparing Iranians with Pakistani and Indians, was wrong. I think Indians and Pakistan in general are not racist. They may have some hang ups about ethnicities and may have some regional biases but really both Indians and Pakistanis suffer so much from the inferiority complex that it is hard for them to conceive that they could be better than some folks other than of Indian or Pakistani origins. So the subcontinents racism is confined to its own people. Iranians on the other hand are a full blown case of racial hatred, if 1) you are not Persian speaking and 2) you are not White. If it is up to Iranians to decide who could live in this world or if you ask them to define superior races, Iranians would be unable to think beyond themselves and the Whites.

The current Iran is Iran because the name was changed when Hitler claimed the superiority of the Aryan race. It was inconceivable for Iranians to let the German claim go by without asserting that they are the true Aryans. Though there certainly are doubts about the validity of this claim.

The current Iran is barely 51% ethnic Persian speaking. A good number of people that are identified as Iranians are of many other ethnicities such as Azuris, kurd, turk, Baloch, and arab. Persian language is forced upon people so almost 100% can understand and speak it but they really are not Persian.

As I mentioned in my previous post, Iran has systematically attacked and subjugated other ethnic groups in Iran. Though now Azuris have begun to assert themselves in areas outside of Tehran. Ethnic clashes and uprisings are kept under tight control and often the outside world is not aware of what is taking place inside that country.

Like many other countries where ethnic differences, cultural, political and economical, are not resolved through a democratic dialog between the ethnic groups, Iran too would see a severe civil war if the central authority is some how physically removed from Tehran.

We saw that phenomenon in Iraq where once the central authority was eroded by the US occupation, it was simply a matter of time for the ethnic and sectarian violence to erupt and continue unabated.

In reality all countries where several ethnicities are combined under one flag and are governed from the top down rather than the top up method, eventually a loss of the central authority would cause major civil wars. We saw that in the former Eastern Europe. Closer home Afghanistan is another good example. Pakistan remains at the verge of a full blown ethnic regrouping but is mostly sustained by strong central force the Army. So if the army in Islamabad is somehow taken out, it will be seriously difficult to keep Pakistan as one country.

We also saw this when India was partitioned when the central British authority was weakened by the second WW and there was no force left, that could have worked with all groups to keep the country united.

In Pakistan’s case, the only redeeming feature is that historically both Sindhi and Punjabis have more things in common than the issues that divide them. In Pakistan, before 1971 Bengali reached that point because they really had nothing in common with people in West Pakistan.

Similarly before partition a Sindhi or Pathan or even a Punjabi had very few things in common with South or East Indians and the decision to form Pakistan was an easy decision to make.

Coming back to Iran, there is a strong urge in the US to find a way to remove the central authority in Iran to plunge that country in to a serious ethnic and sectarian violence like the way it was done in Iraq. The issue before the US is whether a military action against Iran would sufficiently destroy the thin fabric of Iran nation and plunge Iran in to a Persian speaking versus the non Persian speaking civil war or not.

Imo, if the US is able to remove the establishment in Tehran, Iran would very quickly slide towards a civil war.

The problem is usually not with the people of a country or community. It is invariably with what its citizens or members are willing to put up with as their leaders, for whatever reasons, be they rooted in fear, ideology, archaic mindsets, or most frequently simple apathy. The Iranians let those mullahs romp all over themselves; just like the Pakistanis let those khakis drag them around like an ox with rope running through its nose – often making inane snorts to exclaim its claim to manhood. Impotent people plus lousy leaders spells catastrophe for the whole population.

#28 by zeemax on March 27, 2007 11:16am PT


(Hint: Dozens of Iranians are held in Iraq on charges of espionage by the coalition)


nice try, but the iranian diplomats were arrested by the American forces, not british forces. The iranians wouldn`t be foolish enough to pick up American forces in this way....

You and your trick questions, Zee! LOL

Question:

Should Iran release the 15 Brit mariners caught in their waters?

(Hint: Dozens of Iranians are held in Iraq on charges of espionage by the coalition)

If yes, why?

bbabu

mmm, not sure if `leftist` would be a fine-grained enough identifier here...I am certain HP and GT have thought more deeply about that issue than I have.

Re: # 17

Stalin and Mao had the maturity and cold blooded instincts to survive.

Re: # 20

kaal:

Your point about `true` leftists reminds me of Oscar (the horse) in Animal Farm. Personally, I have had friends from the CPM who were cast aside after a lifetime of work simply for suggesting more democracy in the party. So, the point that I am making is that these good folks are taken advantage of even by their own parties.

HP:

Welcome back. I have never visited Iran and so I shall take what you say seriously. But that surprises me more. For a start consider the following:

(i) Like Ranjit, and you say, there is racism everywhere. However, unlike in Pakistan and in India the Iranians seem to understand that there is racism in Iran and that racism is not the best facet to carry around. (This is just my guess and I may be wrong).

(ii) I try to watch programmes on Iran whenever I can. There was this footage of burkha clad women discussing family planning in a masjid (or maybe in its premise). Heck, these women were more liberated than many bimbos I have come across who know zilch about their rights or how thet are exploited.

(iii) To end, go to the math olympiad website and see Iran`s ranking (compare it with India`s or Bulgaria`s). I shall not tell you more for that will take away all the excitement.

#17 Kal
``Wonder if that strengthens the theory about most leftists being men and women who never attain emotional maturity or political adulthood``
there is some merit to that statement ...Churchill once said if you are young and not a liberal you don`t have a heart and if you are older and not a conserative you don`t have a mind....i guess leftists take some time to give up...recently west bengal govt. communist regime fired ion nnocent farmers to take there land for capitalist Tata mnc business venture....

#21 by jamesmaxwell on March 27, 2007 3:10am PT


I remember the scene from Crash where the gunstore owner heaps racist abuse on the iranian but what really hurts him is that the guy called him an arab.

Re:HP#18

HP yaar, everyone and their uncle is a racist in this world. Its just that when they face racism from others, they adopt a holier than thou attitude. Heck, even the tutsis and hutus in Rwanda are racists as one group thinks they are fairer than the other!!!

Iranians suffer from frustration that they are physically semi-``goras`` but are not recognized as such. How the hell will they get that appreciation if economically and culturally they are way below par as compared to Europe? If you cover your women up from head to toe and run a mullah led government with a crappy economy, how do you expect people to think of you as goras? Jeez!!

Re: # 18

Agreed.

There is a lot of fake racist pride in Iran which has been exacerbated by the unpopularity of the current regime. Some Iranians go to the extent of saying that the current regime is an ``Arab`` regime, which is plain wrong. Everything bad that has happened to Iran is blamed on the ``Arabs``, which is nonsense.

Islam and the Arabs have become very convenient scapegoats for young Iranians.

The most naive of all Iranians are second generation American-Iranians most of whom have never visited Iran.

Sorry, HP, I will not take up that challenge because none of that was meant for your eyes! An enthusiastic welcome to the board, however. :)

---

[You might have suspected so already: My posts don`t necessarily state my own personal beliefs and values, at least not literally and directly (Please be sure, all my past heroes have been from the left, and probably will continue to be in future. So sincere apologies for any resentment caused. It was unintended.)]