By Eric Vandenbroeck
and co-workers
In 1936, Dr. Hjalmar
Schacht, the German Finance Minister and President of the Reichbank
paid a visit to Reza Shah. A year after, the speaker of Iranian Majlis, Hasan Esfandiari,
visited Berlin and was cordially received by Hitler. Goring, Schacht and other
Nazi Party members (Lenczowski, 1949, p. 161).
Towards the end of 1937, Reza Shah was visited by Baldur von Schirach, the head of the Nazi Youth Organization. Through
him, Hitler sent an invitation to Reza Shah to visit Germany. In the same year
(1937), Reza Shah granted to German Luftansa a
concession to fly passengers freight and mail across Iran's northern sector to
link Berlin with Tehran and Kabul. The Shah even went so far as granting Luftansa the permission to land in an important military
airport in Mashhad (Rezun, 1982. p. 25).
Editored by Major von Viban of the
Political Department of the NADPA in Berlin, the very year (1933) Hitler took
power the Nazis began to publish a racist magazine titled lran-e
Bastan (The Ancient Iran). The journal was financed
by Siemens-Schukken and a pro-Nazi Iranian
intellectual named Sheikh Abdul-Rahman Seif worked as co-editor of the journal
(Blucher. 1949, p. 137).
This provided the
starting point for Persian nationalists to launch their attack on whoever they
did not see as 'Aryan', followed by all kinds of chauvinistic magazines,
journals and newspapers such as Iranshahr, Mehr-e Iran (the Love of Iran), Partow-e
Iran (the Light of Iran), Anahita, Takht-e Jamshid (the seat of Jamshid.
imaginary ancient Persian king) and quickly dominated the Persian literary
scene.
Thus the Nazis found
a favorable climate amongst the lranian elite to
spread Nazi propaganda, advocating the (supposedly) common Aryan ancestry of
'the two Nations.' In 1936 then, the Reich Cabinet issued a special decree
exempting Iranians from the restrictions of the Nuremberg Racial Laws on the
grounds that they were 'pure blooded Aryans' (Lenczowski,
1944, p. 160). And in 1939, the Nazis provided Persians with what they called a
German Scientific Library. The library contained over 7.500 books carefully
selected "to convince lranian readers...of the
kinship between the National Socialist Reich and the "Aryan culture"
of Iran" (Lenczowski, 1944, p. 161). In various
pro-Nazi publications, lectures, speeches, and ceremonies, parallels were drawn
between the Shah of Iran and Hitler, and praise the charisma and virtue of the Fuhrerprinzip (Rezun, 1982, p.
29).
In turn the Iranian
government sponsored conferences in which Nazi lecturers were invited to
deliver speeches on race, ethnicity, culture and history. Among lranian intellectuals, those who demonstrated pro-Nazi
tendencies were awarded titles and honorary degrees. Reza Khan's regime went so
far as accepting the emblem of the swastika as a permanent decoration of art in
Iran, and Hitler became anational hero of Iranians
and all so-called 'oppressed Aryan peoples. For instance, a journal titled
"Nameh-ye Iran-e Bastan"
(the Journal of Ancient Iran) identified Hitler as "one of the greatest
men in the world": Adolph Hitler, this great scholarly man of the Aryan
race, has destroyed a 200-years old plan of the Jews against nationality in the
world, against nationalism, and particularly the Aryan races on earth...and has
created a new day for the new world. (Nameh-ye Iran-e
Bastan,1933, p.1)
Regarding the Nazi
symbol of the swastika, the journal wrote in issue 28, Mordad,1933: It is truly
rejoicing to see that the symbol of Iran from 2000 years before Christ has
today become a symbol of pride for the Germans, who are of one race and
ethnicity with us (cited in JAMI, 1983, pp. 74-5)
Again, in issue 35, Mehr 1333, in an article titled "Why We Are
Superior?" the journal wrote: the sign of Aryan triumph (swastika) is
everywhere Aryan and respectable, be it on ceramics of Isfahan's Masjid-e Shah
or on the columnn of Darvazeh
Dovlat in Tehran; or be it placed on the flag of
Germany or embellish the arm of Hitler:' From ancient times the Black dress has
been an exclusive property of the Iranic race.
If other nations have
also made it their official dress or- for instance the Fascists of Italy have
made it their specific symbol, one must know that based on the absolute role of
history this has been an idea of the Iranians who are the father of all
civilized Aryan nations. (cited in JAMI, 1983, p. 75)
In fact the ideology
of Aryan racial superiority was nurtured and advocated by a vast majority of
Persian elites and intellectuals. Even members of non- Persian minority groups
were eager to identify themselves with the Nazis and the 'superior Aryan race.'
For example in the following passage Baygi a member
of the Turkic-speaking Qashqayi community talks about
the way he and his young friend considered Iran to be the representative of
'the superior race' in Asia, just as Germany was supposed to be in Europe. His
depiction of Nazi mentality, of 'superior Aryan race' and their connection to
Iran is a reflection of how the majority of Iranian intellectuals viewed the
world at the time. “Germany was our age-old and natural ally, Love of Germany
was synonymous with love for Iran. The sound of German officers' footsteps was
heard on the shores of the Nile. Swastika flags were flying from the outskirts
of Moscow to the peaks of the Caucasus Mts. Iranian patriots eagerly awaited
the arrival of their old allies. My friend and I would spin tales about the
grandeur of the superior race. We considered Germany the chosen representative
of this race in Europe and Iran its representative in Asia. The right to life
and role was ours. Others had no choice but submission and slavery. We
discarded the old maps and remade Iran into a country larger than what it was
in Achaemenian times.” (Baygi, 1989, cited in Sprachman, 2002, pp. 203-4)
It was also shared
and commonly nurtured by a great majority of poets, writers, artists, and
intellectuals who mainly carne from the privileged ethnic and linguistic
background. So, when the allies deposed Reza Khan in the August of 1941 due to
his pro-Nazi activities, racism and Aryanism did not disappear. On the
contrary, they continued to grow and flourish and be it to a lesser degree, as
we shall see they still exist today.
In June 1941, German
forces began their offensive against the USSR. Soon after the offensive, the
Soviet and British diplomatic missions in Tehran demanded the expulsion of a
large number of Germans, accusing the Iranian government of sheltering a German
fifth column (Lenczowski. 1949. p. 168).
On August 25, 1941,
Soviets from the north and the British from the south invaded Iran. On
September 16, 1941, the allied forces deposed Reza Shah and pUl
his young son Mohammad Reza in power. On the following morning, September 17,
British and Soviet forces entered Tehran. Reza Shah's brutal army, which was so
fierce and brave in killing dissenting Iranians and plundering non Persian
communities, capitulated in the face of the occupying forces. And Reza Khan
fled the country, seeking exile first on the island of Mauritius and then in
Johannesburg, South Africa, where he died on 26 July, 1944.
His son, the young
Mohammad Reza faithfully continued to improve his father's dream of a
Fars-centered, aggressive nationalism, a powerful centralized state, and a
superficially emulative westernization of the country. The first serious
challenge to his rule came through the demands of various nationalities and
ethnic groups for equal treatment, cultural rights, and the right for
self-determination. Among various ethnic movements. those of the Azeri and
Kurdish nationalities posed the most important challenge to the new shah' s
post WWII rule. Their struggle eventually culminated in the formation of the
Democratic Republics of Azerbaijan and Kurdistan in 1945.
It is an undisputable
fact of Iranian politics even today that whenever there has been a weakening in
the authority of the central government, various regional and ethnic movements
have erupted throughout the country. This redefining notions of
national/geographic boundaries in Iran was already the case immediately before
the takeover of Reza Khan, when the Qajar dynasty was at its weakest. It was
the ease during the First World War, and most certainly, during the Second
World War. Similar to previous eases, the breakout of World War II brought
about the conditions for various National, ethnic and anti-racist sentiments to
explode.
On August 25, 1941,
the Red Army invaded northern parts of Iran, pushing the Pahlavi regime's
military out of Azerbaijani territory. Following these changes, an ethnic
organization called The Azerbaijan Society was formed and started publishing a
journal titled Azerbaijan. The journal was written in Azeri and Farsi languages
and aimed to expose the racist nature of the Pahlavi Government.
In October 1943, Mir Ja'far Pishevari, a seasoned
journalist and political activist, was nominated from Azerbaijan to the 14th
Majlis of Iran. He was a 50-year-old native of Azerbaijan who had spent most of
his life in Baku and had returned to Iran after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution.
Due to his anti-government activities, he had been imprisoned by Reza Shah's
regime for 12 years. After Reza Shah's fall, Pishevari,
along with other political prisoners, bad been set free. Upon his freedom. he
had come to Tehran and started publishing a newspaper called Azhir (the Siren). The people of Tabriz had voted for him
unanimously. Despite his victory in Azerbaijan, the Iranian Majlis had rejected
his candidacy on the grounds that he was a communist, a traitor and disloyal to
Iran's territorial integrity. Khoyi, another
Azerbaijani deputy from the city of Tabriz, had met the same fate as Pishevari.
The Azeris viewed,
the parliament's rejection of their elected candidates as a direct insult to
their integrity and their nationality (JAMI. 1978). Following his rejection by
the parliament, Pishavari entrusted the editorship of
Azhir to friends and returned to Azerbaijan in August
1945 to form the Azerbaijan Democratic Party. On November 23, the Central
Committee of the Azerbaijan Democratic Party issued a proclamation defining its
aim as the obtainment of complete autonomy for Azerbaijan. The party made it
clear that autonomy for Azerbaijan did not mean secession from Iran. The people
of Tabriz warmly welcomed the formation of the Azerbaijan Democratic Party.
Following the ADP's
proclamation, a regional Congress of Azerbaijan that was composed of party
supporters, designated a 39-membered commission to organize elections to a
national assembly. On December 12 the provincial National Assembly was formally
inaugurated in Tabriz. Tbe assembly was composed of
101 deputies, a11 democrats and Azeri nationalists from various backgrounds
such as workers and laborers, who were determined to demand autonomy for
Azerbaijan Atabaki, 1993, p. 129).
As its first
important task on the day of inauguration, the National Assembly proclaimed the
autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan and designated a government under the
premiership of Mir Ja'far Pishevari,
the founder of the Azerbaijan Democratic Party. The newly formed government of
Azerbaijan announced that the autonomous state would be run on 'democratic
principles'. It issued a program that granted women the right to vote; it
announced that private property would be respected but that the government would
distribute to landless farmers state-owned lands as well as the lands of
reactionary landlords who had run away from Azerbaijan, as a result of the
ongoing movement. Further, the government assured the Azerbaijani people that
'traitors and reactionaries' would be purged from the gendarmerie; that a
'people's army' would be formed from local militia groups; and that Azeri-
Turkic would be the official language of the state.
Simultaneously with
the Azerbaijani movement, a Kurdish movement took place in the province of
Kurdistan, west of Azerbaijan. On December 15, 1945, the Democratic Party of
Kurdistan proclaimed a Kurdish People's Republic. On January 21, 1946, Qazi
Mohammad was elected to the presidency of the Republic. The Kurdish Republic
set out to follow the democratic reforms and events taking place in the
neighboring Azerbaijan. While sending observers to the Azerbaijan parliament,
the Kurds maintained their distinct identity and insisted on the independence
of the Kurdish Republic. Following the negotiations between the two republics,
a treaty was signed on April 23, 1946, between the Kurdistan and Azerbaijan
governments. While emphasizing the mutual respect, cooperation and brotherhood
between the two oppressed nations, the treaty provided for military alliance,
exchange of diplomatic missions. fair treatment of minorities and common
diplomatic action towards the Pahlavi regime in Tehran (See Roosevelt. 1947).
The Azerbaijan
Democratic Government quickly proceeded to carry out its plans. As a major step
in eliminating feudal oppression, it started a land distribution program all
over the Republic. On 16 February 1946, the National Assembly of Azerbaijan
passed two important bills regarding the land reform. Based on these bills,
lands belonging to reactionary feudals who had
opposed the national government, or who had left Azerbaijan due to the
democratic movement, were to be distributed among landless farmers. Considering
the fact that the majority of Azerbaijani feudal lords had already run away
from Azerbaijan in the process of the democratic movement, this distribution
amounted to a significant portion of agrarian land (See Mehrban,
1982; Atabaki, 1993).
Moreover, the bills
asked for the redistribution of all state-owned lands, along with the water
rights, rivers, springs and ganats, among the
peasants who lived on those lands and who cultivated them. The reform resulted
in the distribution of over 380.000 hectares of land amongst more than one
million landless peasants (Atabaki, 1993). Following
the two above-mentioned bills, another bill was passed that dealt with the
system of 'sharecropping.'
Traditionally there
was no viable agreement between the peasant and the landlord regarding the
peasant's share of the crop. Normally it was left to the benevolence of the
landlord to decide what to give to each peasant in exchange for his cultivation
of the land. The new bill guaranteed to each farmer a minimum share of the crop
which he produced on a landlord's land. Now the farmer's share rose from about
20 per cent in the old system to more than 43 per cent (Atabaki,
1993. p. 150).
Considering the fact
that about 75 per cent of the people in Azerbaijan were farmers at the time (Kazemi, 1980. p.14), the land reform testified to the
profoundly popular nature of the Azerbaijani Democratic Movement.
In the course of less
than one year, the Democratic Government was able to lay the foundation of a
modem educational system in Azerbaijan. In terms of education and pedagogy. the
National Government completely revolutionized Azerbaijani society. The first
provincial university in Iran was built in Tabriz. Thousands of schools were
built in small towns and villages all over Azerbaijan, accompanied by the
introduction of compulsory primary education for all kids beginning at the age
of six. For the first time,Azeri- Turkic became the
official language in Azerbaijan and was taught in Tabriz University (the only
university in Azerbaijan), schools, and adult education centers, replacing
Farsi.
For the first time in
the history of the Middle East also, universal suffrage was introduced. Women
gained the right to elect as well as be elected. The ADP encouraged women to
take active parts in the socio-political life of the republic. As a result,
women participated in various positions from administration to teaching to
working in the hospitals and even to serving in the national army of Azerbaijan
(JAMI, 1978, pp. 289-95). Important measures were taken to secure the rights of
the workers and emphasize the obligations of the employers, landlords, and
owners-operators of small workshops. A labor code was introduced that limited
the work to eight hours a day; introduced minimum wages; forbade child labor,
acknowledged trade unions; and established the right of the workers to social
benefits (ADP.1946).
William Douglas, an
American Jurist who was traveling in Azerbaijan shortly after the democratic
movement, notes: "I learned from my travels in Azerbaijan in 1950 that Pishevari was an astute politician who forged a program for
Azerbaijan that is still enormously popular" (1951. p. 43).
Pishevari's program was so popular-especially land reform, severe
punishment of public officials who took bribes, and price control--that if
there had been a free election in Azerbaijan during the summer of 1950, Pishevari would have been restored to power by the vote of
90 per cent of the people. And yet, not a thousand people in Azerbaijan out of
three million are communists. (Douglas. 1951. p. 50)
Or in the words of Swietochowski (1995): "Azerbaijan had achieved more in
one year than it had during the twenty years of the Pahlavi regime" (p.
149). Although the rate and pace of changes were faster in Azerbaijan than they
were in the neighboring Kurdish Republic, Kurdistan was embracing many
cultural, political, and socioeconomic transformations hitherto unknown in the
region. Similar to the Azerbaijani situation. the Democratic Party of
Kurdistan, led by Qazi Mohammed, was at the forefront of these transformations.
On November 8th. 1945, the party publicly announced its program and long-term
policies:
1. The Kurds to be
free and independent in the management of their local affairs and to receive
Kurdish independence within the borders of Iran.
2. Be allowed to
study Kurdish and to administer their affairs in the Kurdish language.
3. Government
officials definitely be appointed from among the local population.
4. Members of the
Kurdish Provincial Council to be elected immediately in
accordance with the Constitutional laws, to supervise all public and Government
works.
5. By the passing of
a general law, the grievances existing between the farmer and the landowner to
be amended and their future positions defined.
6. The Democratic
Party of Kurdistan will make special efforts to create complete unity and
brotherhood between the Azerbaijan nation and the people who live in Azerbaijan
(Assyrian, Armenians, and so on).
7. The Democratic
Party of Kurdistan will fight to take advantage of the boundless natural wealth
of Kurdistan and to improve the agriculture. Commerce, education and health of
Kurdistan. in order to seeure economic and moral
welfare for the Kurds.
8. We wish the
nations who live in Iran to be able to work for their freedom and for the
welfare and progress of their country. (DPK. 1945; see also Koohi-Kamali,
2003. p. 106).
In addition to
various economic, political, and cultural developments, the Kurdish Republic
signed an imponant agreement of Friendship and
Cooperation with its Azerbaijani counterpart. This agreement further
highlighted the common goal of the struggle of two oppressed peoples and their
common desire for autonomy and self determination,
based on this mutually signed treaty:
1. Representatives
will be exchanged between the two National Governments in
such places as may be considered necessary.
2. In specified parts
of Azerbaijan which are inhabited by Kurds. Kurds will take part in the
administrative work of government and in specified parts of Kurdistan which are
inhabited by Azerbaijanis, Azerbaijanis will take part in the administrative
work of government.
3. In order to solve
the common economic problems of the two nations a mixed Economic Commission
will be formed and the heads of the two National Governments will endeavor to
put into practice the decisions of this Commission.
4. Cooperation
between the military forces of the Azerbaijan National Government will be
organized and in time of need the military forces of each government will
mutually render each other a11 necessary assistance.
5. If any negotiating
with the Tehran Government becomes necessary it shall be undertaken after
agreement between the views of both the Azerbaijan and Kurdistan National
Governments.
6. The Azerbaijan
National Government will as far as possible create the necessary condition for
the development of the national language and culture of the Kurds living in
Azerbaijan and the National Government of Kurdistan will likewise as far as
possible create the necessary conditions for the development of the national
language and culture of Azerbaijanis living in Kurdistan.
7. The two
contracting parties will take joint steps to punish any person who attempts to
destroy or smireh the historic friendship and
national, democratic brotherhood of the Azerbaijan and Kurdish peoples. (cited
in Koohi-Kamali, 2003, pp. 114-115)
This joint treaty of
friendship and cooperation was a major blow to the dominant Aryanist ideology
which considered the Kurds an Aryan people and looked upon the Azeris as a
non-Aryan, non-Indo-European, Turkic people. This experience once again showed
that, being subjected to a common oppression is capable of creating a common
zone of resistance against racism and colonialism. It also showed that
divisions such as Aryan and non-Aryan were artificial constructs created to
secure the privileged position of the dominant group particularly by dividing
the oppressed communities and turning them against each other. When it came to
destroying the marginalized communities' autonomous nationhood, civic rights and
democratic freedoms, the Indo European speaking Kurdish community was as much a
target as the Turkic speaking Azeri community.
It was and is only
through cooperation, sharing, and the common struggle of these oppressed
communities that the racist and colonialist system in Iran can be defeated.
The Triumph of Racist Order and the Collapse of the
Republics.
The elections for the
15th Majlis of Iran were to begin on December 7, 1946. At this time, Soviet
forces had already left Azerbaijan and the Soviet consulate in Tabriz was
pushing the ADP for negotiation and peaceful settlement of the issues with the
Iranian government. Qavam-us-Saltaneh,
the Iranian prime minister, after promising a major oil concession to the USSR.
had returned to Tehran from his Moscow trip. The oil concession had been
granted to the Soviets on the condition that it be ratified by the future
Majlis.
The oil concession
did not only mean establishing of a strong economic relationship between the
two countries, more importantly, it meant the security of Soviet borders in
Iranian northern zone, particularly in the rivalry with the British and the
newly arrived Americans. The Soviets were very concerned about the security of
their borders with Iran and a beneficial oil concession meant that their active
presence in northern and north-western parts of Iran would be guaranteed. After
extorting the oil concession, now the Russians needed its ratification. And
this called for a speedy election processes to the new Majlis. Qavam had made it dear that the elections would not be held
unless the government was in a position to supervise thema11 over the country,
including Azerbaijan and Kurdistan. The existence of autonomous Azeri and
Kurdish republics had thus become an obstacle for the ratification of the
Russian oil concession. Without considering any ethical, ideological, or
political consequences of their actions, the Russians decided to side with the
Pahlavi regime, pressing the republics to surrender.
In a famous letter
written to Pishevari on May 8, 1946, the Joseph
Stalin threatened the Azerbaijani leader over the latter's diversion from what
Stalin called "the Lenin's path." He advised the Azeri leader that
the advantage of Azerbaijan's working class, as well as the working peoples of
Iran and the whole world, would only be maintained through ADP's cooperation
with Prime Minister Qavam-us-Saltaneh
(Araz, 1996).
In the meantime, the
British, now working hand in hand with Qavam, had
engineered another scenario in the south. In September 1946, a puppet Qashqayi chief in the south led his Qashqayi
tribes to capture a number of towns and villages. They then issued a list of
demands asking for autonomy similar to that of Azerbaijan and Kurdistan. They
made it dear that if the government did not destroy the autonomous republics,
the Qashqayis would capture more towns and would
constitute their own autonomous republic. The ADP considered the Qashqayi rebellion a scenario orchestrated by the central
government in order to crush the autonomous republics (JAMI, 1978, pp. 374-97).
Through the Qashqayi rebellion, the British manifested their strength
to the Iranian ruling elite and, thereby, further emboldened Qavam-us-Saltaneh in his
determination to destroy the autonomous republics (Lenczowski,
1949, p. 307).
Around mid-October, Qavarn formed a new cabinet and reached an agreement with Qashqayi chiefs in the south. promising them that he would
use a11 his power to protect Iran's territorial integrity, and (0 return
Azerbaijan and Kurdistan back to the mother land. Meanwhile, George V. Allen,
the newly appointed American Ambassador to Iran, made it dear that his
government was supportive of Prime Minister Qavam's
'democratic decisions' and would do whatever it could to implement them (Lenczowski, 1949. p. 308).
On the pretext of
supervising parliamentary elections, on November 24. 1946. Qavam
ordered the troops to march into Azerbaijan. On December 3,Pishevari assured
the Azerbaijnis that the national army of Azerbaijan
was ready to defend the republic. He made it clear that there would be
"death but no return" to colonial conditions in Azerbaijan.
On December 10. Qavam's army reached Azerbaijani territory. The first
confrontation took place in the outskirts of Mianeh.
The Azerbaijani army pushed the invading forces back and advanced towards Zanjan (JAMI, 1978, p. 415).
Nevertheless, two
days later, the ADP, under heavy pressures from the Soviets, decided to give up
resistance and allow the lranian army to enter into
Azerbaijan. The premier of Azerbaijan, Ja'far Pishevari, rejected the Soviet demand to surrender and
argued in favor of resistance (JAMI. 1978. pp. 416-17).
The other Central
Committee members of ADP followed the Soviet line. Pishevari
resigned from the government and left for Baku. On December 12, 1946, the
remaining ADP leaders called on all Azerbaijanis to abandon resistance and
allow the Iranian army a peaceful entry into Tabriz. Tbe
army, on the other hand, was anything but peaceful. Conscious and assured of
non-resistance on the part of Azerbaijanis, the army, accompanied by gangs and
thugs hired and armed by local landlords, entered Azerbaijan and savagely
massacred its unarmed people.
When the Persian Army
returned to Azerbaijan, it came with a roar. Soldiers ran riot, looting and
plundering, taking what they wanted. The Russian Army had been on its best
behavior. The Persian Army--the army of emancipation--was a savage army of
occupation. It left a brutal mark on the people. The beards of peasants were
burned, their wives and daughters raped. Houses were plundered; livestock was
stolen, leaving death and destruction behind. (Douglas, 1951, p. 45)
After the invasion of
Azerbaijan the Iranian army marched into the neighboring Republic of Kurdistan.
The leader of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, Qazi Mohammad. was hanged in Mlrabad, along with his supporters. Mass executions of
participants, sympathizers, and those suspected of supporting the national
movements were performed in public, followed by the burning of books, magazines
and pamphlets published in ethnic languages. Shortly after the fall of national
governments, the “Book-Burning" ceremonies became a source of celebration
and entertainment for the members of the dominant group and their invading
army. The Aryanist ruling elite made it clear that the “Book-Buming" rituals were conducted for the purpose of
sealing the destiny of Azeri Turkic in Iran once for all (Heyat
1983,1990; Berengian. 1988; Haqqi.
1993; Farzaneh, 1999).
The invading army
remained in Azeri and Kurdish areas and continued the persecution of supporters
of the national movements. After a few years, the Iranian Government declared a
national amnesty and military rule was lifted. The Iranian chauvinistic
propaganda, along with a relentless campaign against the democratic movements,
however continued. Eyewitnesses and Azerbaijani sources have estimated the
number of people killed in Azerbaijan and Kurdistan during the occupation to be
over 50.000 (Hassanpour, 1994; Fardoust,
1992).
Although the
movements were brutally suppressed, they made a lasting impact in the history
of the struggle of Azeri and Kurdish peoples for self-determination. The
Democratic Parties that led the two movements are active today and pursue the
aims and goals of the fallen republics. The experience gained from the two
republics has been an unprecedented experience in self-governance and
nation-building. They were an inseparable link in the successive struggles for
democracy, freedom, and independence-the Babi movement (1848-53); the tobacco
movement (1890-92); the Constitutional Revolution (1905-11); the revolutionary
struggles of Azerbaijan, Gilan, and Khurasan
(1918-21); the oil nationalization movement of 1951-53; the 1967-68 uprising of
Kurdistan; the 1978-79 revolution; and the autonomy movement of Kurdistan
(since 1979). The two movements were distinguished from their predecessors by
their distinctively nationalist character. (Hassanpour,
1994, p. 98)
A History of Iran: The Iran Documents P.1
The
Iran Documents P.3: Aryanisation 1950-2005
The Iran Documents P.4: Today's Culture War to Heat Up?
List
of consulted literature and references
For updates
click homepage here