The below article was written at their request, and published as such (slightly re-edited and minus the formatting) in Islam online, a few years after the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the US (-led) troops. Subtitles and headlines are by Islam Online.
Iran & the Struggle for Iraq's Soul
The Saga of Iranians in Iraq
By Dr. Shuja’ Ed-Din Zia’ian
York Center for International & Security Studies - Canada
(Read Dr. Mahjoob Zweiri’s comment on this article : History Alone Is Not Enough)
***
The invasion of Iraq has opened the door to a fiery debate over Iraq's identity, with different factions and groups making claims over land and resources. And given the cultural intermixing between Iran and Iraq over the centuries, some Iranian analysts raise major questions about Iraq's national and religious identities. Below, Dr. Shuja’ Ed-Din Zia’ian discusses Iraq's history and current situation from an Iranian viewpoint.
***
Coming from the other side of the planet, astonishingly, the Anglo-American troops have been accusing neighbouring Iran of interfering in Iraqi affairs. While dictating what the policies of the democratically elected government in Iraq should be, the Anglo-American troops, with their fantastic military and financial might, are attempting to "protect" Iraq from the Iranian influence. It sounds like strangers invading your home and forcing you to deny your family and to oust your parents and relatives.
Iraq and Iran are not separate entities, a point which is rarely - if ever - mentioned. The two have been separated and forced to live separately only following the British victory over the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I, which resulted in the creation of the state of Iraq with its present boundaries.
With the approval of the newly formed League of Nations, Great Britain gained control over the mandate of Iraq in 1919, installing a non-Iraqi Arab as the ruler of Iraq in 1921. A member of the Sunni Hashemite family, Emir Faysal of Mecca (who had never put his feet in Iraq) was rewarded the Iraqi throne for leading the Arab revolt against the Ottomans under Colonel T. E. Lawrence – known as Lawrence of Arabia. The newly created British state of Iraq was proclaimed an Arab state despite the existence of two other major ethnic and religious groups: the Sunni Kurds in the north and the Persian Shiites in the south.
Naturally, Iranian Iraqis[1] protested. Shiite Scholars called for Jihad against foreign colonialism, waging an armed rebellion against the British mandate in Iraq. It was an Arab–Persian rebellion in which Arab tribes and Persian mujtahids (religious scholars) fought side by side. Under the leadership of Ayatollah Shirazi, who was born in Shiraz and raised in Karbala, the rebellion gained almost all over the country by August 1920 (before the crowning of Faysal). Contrary to what was happening in other countries, where Arabs urged by the British rebelled against the Ottoman Empire, the population in Iraq rebelled against the British.
Ottoman or Persian Iraq?
The creation of an Iraqi Arab state resulted in the so-called Shiite-Sunni clash, which is a religious façade to a cultural and political dispute.
From the 14th century till World War I, Ottoman and Persian rulers disputed over the province of Iraq, which, at the time of WW1, was administrated as a condominium where citizens could choose to hold either the Ottoman or the Persian/Iranian nationalities. The cities of Karbala and Najaf, in particular, had a status of extraterritoriality, never being ruled completely by the Ottoman Empire.
In the 18th century, Karbala and Najaf became a center of attraction for Persian Shiites, who moved and settled there. The architecturally Persian mausoleums were constantly embellished by the successive Persian rulers. Besides Karbala and Najaf, both Persian language and culture were dominant in two other major religious centres in Iraq: Kazemeyn and Samara. The Persian cultural influence affected all Iraqi social classes, particularly in southern Iraq. Such an effect could be felt on farmers, businessmen, workers and, of course, the religious scholars and students who came from all over the world (Luizard, 2005).
The British occupation and creation of an Iraqi Arab state resulted in the so-called Shiite-Sunni clash, which can be perceived as a religious façade to a cultural and political dispute in which Persians/Iranians challenged the Arab domination imposed by the British mandate in Iraq. For the Persians/Iranians in Iraq, it was a fight for their survival as a cultural entity and for their right to protect their Iranian roots. Thus, Arab rulers suspected that their real allegiance was to Persia – later known as Iran.
The British occupation proved to be fatal for Iranians in Iraq. From a population of around 3 million at the time of Iraq's creation, the number of Persian citizens dropped to several hundreds of thousands (Luizard, 2005).
It is however important to note that the numbers for Kurds and Lors, who shared their "Iranity" with Persians, should be added to the above mentioned figure. Yet, according to a British census conducted in 1919, the number of Persians in Iran was about 80,000 only — less than 3 percent of the inhabitants of Iraq. The British census excluded mixed marriages, Persian families living in Iraq for several generations, and all those who had Persian citizenship but were not considered purely Persian. This was the first phase of an ethnic cleansing process carried out by the British (Luizard, 2005).
In 1919, Sir Arnold Wilson, the British civil commissioner in Baghdad, argued that there were too many Persian consulates in Iraq and suggested the closure of a number of them. The British then proceeded with reinforcing the Arab character of Karbala by proclaiming Arabic as the administrative language in Iraq. Religious leaders of Persian origin were expelled to Persia (Luizard, 2005).
The Sunni-Arab Domination
In 1969, twenty thousand Iranian Iraqis were expulsed to the Iranian city of Ghasr-e Shirin.
With the assistance of the British, Sunni Arabs took control over governmental institutions, disregarding three quarters of the population, which consisted of Kurds (Sunnis) and Persian-Arab Shiites. Furthermore, an anti-Persian propaganda was orchestrated by the British. Persian businessmen lost all protection in the British- Iraqi courts in 1922 (Luizard, 2005)
On October 9, 1924, the Code of Nationalities obliged Persians in Iraq to choose between two nationalities: Persian or Iraqi. Arabs and other ethnicities were not forced to make such a choice; they could remain Arab and Iraqi, or Kurd and Iraqi. This law was used by the successive Sunni Arab-dominated Iraqi governments as part of an ethnic cleansing process of Persians in Iraq (Luizard, 2005).
Naturally, Tehran did not recognize the new state created by British colonialism, dissuading its nationals in Iraq from accepting to hold the new Iraqi citizenship and identity in an attempt to protect their rights. But, by 1929, the Iranian resistance waned and Tehran eventually accepted the new status quo
Left without protection, Persians left their homes and there was an exodus of Persians from Iranian Iraq to the Iranian neighbouring province of Khuzestan. The massive purge of Iranians continued under British-protected Arab governments.
The pan-Arab Baathist governments of Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr and Saddam Hussein emphasized the Arab nature of the system and its anti-Iranian stand[2]. In 1969, twenty thousand Iranian Iraqis were expelled to the Iranian city of Ghasr-e Shirin, followed by other waves of massive deportations in the subsequent years (Babakhan, 2005).
Under the British mandate, being Iraqi became equivalent to being a Sunni Arab; hence, three quarters of Iraq’s population turned into second class citizens or foreigners on their own land. Although they had been living in Iraq for many centuries and generations, some Iraqis were considered foreign nationals, because they were Shiites or because they were of Persian origin — the two being often associated to each other.
Ironically, foreigners who were neither born, nor raised in Iraq and who had no attachment of any sort to the land were considered Iraqis because of their Sunni- Arab affiliations. King Faysal, who ascended the throne with the help of the British, who brought him form Mecca, symbolized such a dichotomy.
Silent Rebellion
Persians assimilated into Arab culture, but the assimilation was less than genuine. A certain Iranian "cultural gene" survived — hidden and censored though.
The Persian-Arab struggle has deep roots in history; it goes back to the time of the Arab-Muslim conquest of Mesopotamia and the defeat of Persian armies fourteen hundred years ago. Out of respect for Islam, historians rarely mention that the conquest was brutal[3].
Persians had to speak Arabic, convert to the new religion and adopt Muslim Arab names not only to survive, but also to benefit from the spoils of war. They assimilated into the conquerors' culture, but the assimilation was less than genuine. A certain Iranian "cultural gene" survived — hidden and censored though. A silent rebellion was manifested in different forms: the promotion of a free-thought-approach towards Islam, asceticism, Sufism and Shiism[4], resulting in what can be called an Iranian-Islamic schizophrenia.
Many Shiites in Iraq are of Iranian origin, but they need to keep such a fact secret. It has been always dangerous for Iraqis of Iranian origin to reveal their ethnic background; however, the issue became even more serious after the creation of the Iraqi state because Iraq was now considered a separate entity. If labeled "Iranian", an Iraqi Shiite would be considered a foreign enemy and a traitor. This was the case especially during the eight-year-war between Iran and Iraq.
Interestingly, the argument that the words "Iraq"[5] and "Baghdad"[6] themselves are Persian is often made. Also, the last name of Ayatollah Sistani, the spiritual leader of Iraqi Shiites, refer to his Iranian origin. Despite the fact that Ctesiphon, the capital of the Persian Empire for many centuries, is located in today's Iraq, and the fact that, under Islamic rule, Persian scholars made significant advances in different fields, from the study of Prophetic traditions to art, architecture, science and literature, there is much hesitance about recognizing the right or presence of Iran in Iraq.
The most important pieces of Arab Iraqi literature were written by Iranian Iraqis.
The Umayyads were toppled by Persian Iraqis and their successors, the Abbasids, were brought and kept in power by Persians.
Persians Under the Islamic Empire
Under Saddam, many Iraqis, including members of Sadr and Hakim families, accused of sympathizing with Iran were executed.
A striking example is Abdullah Ibn al-Muqaffa, the famous author of Kalila and Dimna, a masterpiece of Arab literature. Ibn al-Muqaffa, who was known as Ruzbeh in Persian, was a Zoroastrian Persian who converted to Islam after the Islamic conquest. Astonishingly, in all scholarly books and encyclopedias, Abdullah Ibn al-Muqaffa is identified as a Muslim or as Arab, not as a Persian. Today, Kalila and Dimna is taught as part of Arabic courses in many prestigious academic institutions, including Yale university.
Although he worked at the court, Ibn al-Muqaffa was executed by orders of the Abbasid Caliph, al-Mansur, who had doubts about his allegiance. He was accused of heresy and of importing Zoroastrian ideas into Islam.
This is not an isolated example; being Persian jeopardized one's very existence. It was a taboo to recognize works and authors as Persian, and is still today.
Abu Muslim al-Khorassani is another famous example. A major supporter of the Abbasid Caliphate, Abu Muslim's military skills helped defeat the Umayyads and brought the Abbasids to power in Baghdad. But soon after, Abu Muslim was assassinated by the Abbasid Caliph who was concerned about his popularity, given Abu Muslim's Persian ethnic background.
Under Saddam, many Iraqis, including members of Sadr and Hakim families, accused of sympathizing with Iran were executed.
Thus, a strong form of censorship has been practiced with regard to the issue of Persians/Iranians in Iraq. And such censorship still exists today. In any geographical map drawn before the British colonization, two "Iraqs" were highlighted: Arab Iraq and Ajam Iraq (Ajam in Arabic means non-Arab, a word that refers mostly to Iranians/Persians).
As a result of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Iran-Iraq war and later the invasion and occupation of Iraq by American troops, many books on Iraq have been published since 1979. However, almost all those books mention nothing about the Iranian presence in Iraq; rather, they focus only on the Babylonian and Assyrian periods — referred to as the Cradle of Civilization, the Islamic period, and modern history. Strangely enough, the fact that Iranians have had an uninterrupted presence in Mesopotamia for over twenty five hundred years is always overlooked.
Successive Conquests
Despite successive conquests, the Iranian presence in Iraq has been continuous.
Despite successive conquests, the Iranian presence in Iraq has been continuous. Using the term ‘foreign intervention’ to describe the Iranian influence in Iraq during the American occupation is like describing the French in Paris during the Nazi occupation as foreigners.
Some historians, influenced by British historians of the colonial era, refer to the Greek era as the end of the Iranian rule. According to them, Alexander the Great defeated the Persian army in 333 BC, bringing Persia under his rule.
What is rarely stated in history books, however, is that Alexander’s military success did not mean a cultural defeat for Persians. Persian soldiers and officers continued to be part of the ruling elite after Alexander’s victory. Alexander himself married a Persian princess and adopted Persian costumes, forced his Greek officers to marry Persian women and kept undamaged the Iranian administration of Satrapies (governors of the provinces of ancient Median). Alexander the Macedonian is actually a respected figure in Iranian history books and literature.
Encouraged by his teacher Aristotle, Alexander was an admirer of Persian culture. He considered himself an Iranian king, adopting the Persian title of Shahinshah (King of kings). Hence, a Macedonian Shahinshah replaced a Persian Shahinshah, continuing a long line of Iranian rulers. The Macedonian rulers were succeeded by Parthian rulers, then by the Sassanians. They all were Iranians who continued the Iranian governance in Iraq until the Arab-Muslim invasion.
The Saga of Iranian Iraqis
There is — or was — a naïve hope that colonial powers came to Iraq as liberators.
In most history books, there is no — or little — mentioning of Iraq’s history from Alexander’s death to the Muslim-Arab conquest of Iraq. During the 1000 years in between, the history of Iraq and Iran cannot be separated. Yet, much emphasis is put on ancient pre-historic Iraq, and on modern Iraq, and astonishingly over thousand years of history when the capital of Iran was Ctesiphon or Tīsfūn (تیسفون) (near present Baghdad) built 4 centuries B.C., is overlooked.
Thus, for around 1200 years, Iraq was purely part of the Iranian homeland. More precisely, from 550 BC to 652 AD, Mesopotamia or Iraq was, fundamentally, Persian.
Except in a few books or articles, there is no mentioning of the saga of Iranians in Iraq since the creation of the Iraqi state at the end of World War I, when hundreds of thousands of Persians had either to accept to change their identity, or to flee.
It is only recently, due to the dramatic international developments of the last two decades, that the world started noticing that Iranians exert some "influence" on Iraq. But, what everyone should know is that next to an Arab Iraq, there is — and has always been — an Iranian Iraq which continued to exist for a thousand years before the Arab invasion.
Today, with the neo-colonial presence of coalition forces in Iraq and the toppling of the pan-Arab, anti-Iranian Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein, the Persian fight for survival has taken a different form. On the one hand, there is — or was — a naïve hope that colonial powers came to Iraq as liberators. Yet, on the other hand, there is a growing fear that these forces came to the region only to secure their imperial interests and that they will resist any form of Iranian revival.
Despite all attempts to marginalize them, Persians have managed more or less to survive, sometimes disguised under an Arab name, speaking Arabic and wearing an Arab mask. Hence, honest historians need to reveal the truth about the story of Iranian Iraq, which is an important part of human history.
Sources:
Babakhan, Ali. Des Irakiens en Iran Depuis la Révolution Islamique. Cahiers D'Etudes Sur La Méditerranée Orientale el Le Monde Turco-Iranien, n° 22 - Arabes et Iraniens, [En ligne], mis en ligne le 4 mars 2005. Consulté le 5 avril 2007.
Luizard, Pierre-Jean. Iraniens d'Irak, Direction Religieuse Chiite et Etat Arabe Sunnite. Cahiers D'Etudes Sur La Méditerranée Orientale el Le Monde Turco-Iranien, n° 22 - Arabes et Iraniens, [En ligne], mis en ligne le 4 mars 2005. Consulté le 8 avril 2007.
Notes
[1] The words "Iran" and "Iranian" in this article do not refer to the state that monopolized the name in 1935, creating the Shahanshahi state of Iran, which became later the Islamic Republic of Iran; rather, they refer to Iranians as a linguistic-cultural group that includes all Iranian languages, including Persian, Kurd, Lor, and Pashtun. Therefore, referring to Kurds and Persians as Iranians has to do with them being part of the wider Iranian linguistic-cultural group. The confusion comes from the fact that the judicial-political boundaries of the modern state of Iran do not correspond to the linguistic-cultural affiliations.
[2] In 1986, the Iranian Ministry of Interior denounced the presence of 500,000 Iraqi refugees, who were deported to Iran. On June 30, 1985, in a press conference in Paris, Laurent, Baudoin and Blum, members of the French Commission of the International Federation of Human Rights, stated that the Iraqi regime had deported to Iran more than 400,000 Iraqis suspected and accused of being opposed to the regime.
[3] Obviously, it was impossible for anyone to risk keeping any account of the brutality of the Muslim invaders, which urged many Persian thinkers and historians to talk about two centuries of silence in Persia/Iran after the Muslim conquest (See: Zarrinkoob, Abdolhossein. Two Centuries of Silence. Tehran, Sukhan, 2000 and see: Al-Biruni, Abu Rayhan. The Remaining Signs of Past Centuries. p.35, 36, 48).
[4] According to historical accounts that might be legendary rather than truthful, the daughter of the last Persian king, Yazdgerd III, was taken prisoner and she got married to the son of Ali Ibn Abitaleb. Such a story provides some sort of reconciliation and legitimacy for Persians by mixing both Persian and Arab blood to produce the line of twelve Shiite Imams, who are, according to that line of reasoning, both Persian and Arab. It makes the Shiites to be affiliated both to the Arab-Islamic and Persian-Iranian heritage and ancestry.
[5] Iraq could be the Arabized word for the Middle Persian word “Erak” or “Arak”, meaning “Low land”. (See: Moin Persian dictionary and encyclopedia)
[6] The word "Baghdad" means "God-given" in Middle Persian.
