Iranian Patriotism and Its Difference from the Far Right
The true essence of Iranian patriotism is occasionally obscured or mischaracterized in Western media, contributing to a lack of understanding about its distinctive qualities.
The true essence of Iranian patriotism is occasionally obscured or mischaracterized in Western media, contributing to a lack of understanding about its distinctive qualities.
This article explores the unique aspects of Iranian nationalism, which has often been misunderstood as akin to the xenophobic and racist right-wing movements prevalent in Western discourse. Understanding this distinction is crucial for a deeper appreciation of Iran's socio-political landscape and its historical resistance against both Eastern and Western hegemonies.
Nationalism, or 'patriotism,' is known as the most liberal political discourse in contemporary Iranian history. This cultural and political discourse stood firmly against totalitarian ideologies like Marxism and Islamist ideologies, preventing Iran from falling into the Communist trap during the turbulent decades of the Cold War. Nevertheless, this movement was defeated in 1979 by an alliance of Communists and Islamists, leading to the overthrow of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi.
Opponents of Iranian nationalism consisted mainly of two anti-Western currents: political Islam and Marxism. Khomeini vehemently condemned nationalism and ordered the removal of nationalist symbols from institutions and political currents. Iranian Marxists, prior to the 1979 revolution, had carried out terrorist attacks against symbols of Western influence. These groups contributed to the overthrow of the Pahlavi regime, which had granted significant freedoms to women and religious minorities. During the Pahlavi era, women and religious minorities enjoyed extensive freedoms, and positive relations existed between Iran and Israel. However, Pahlavi's opponents targeted American diplomats and fought against women's rights, while many nationalists continued to promote Western culture and the country's development.
To better understand the profound differences between Iranian nationalism and xenophobia, it is necessary to consider the ideas of the Constitutional Revolution era and the years that followed. Mirza Aqa Khan Kermani and Seyed Hassan Taqizadeh, two prominent Iranian thinkers, were committed to structural reforms and modern Western teachings. Kermani, a pioneer of the Constitutional movement, emphasized the need for Iran to distance itself from tyranny and superstitions, while Taqizadeh advocated modernization inspired by Western democracies. Both emphasized the importance of education, freedom of expression, and the media as foundations of democracy. This line of thought, after a relatively long hiatus during the 1960s and 1970s, under the intellectual influence of leftists and Soviet enthusiasts, has been revived in recent decades among Iranians and has become the focus of their struggle against the Islamic Republic.
Western nationalism arose after the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire and the establishment of nation-states in Europe, but Iranian patriotism is the result of thousands of years of nation-state existence in Iran and the peaceful coexistence of different ethnic groups side by side. This type of patriotism, unlike Western nationalism, which was aggressive in the age of post-Renaissance nation states, has been defensive and not only served as a barrier against extremist Islamism, but also a factor for Iran's territorial unity and national sovereignty.
During the Pahlavi era, which was founded on Iranian patriotism, religious minorities such as Jews, Christians and Baha'is enjoyed extensive freedoms that were unparalleled in the Middle East. These freedoms were significant as they demonstrated a unique aspect of tolerance and progressive policies in the region. These minorities were not only free in worship but many entrepreneurs belonging to these communities also held prominent economic positions in Iranian society. The Family Protection Law, enacted during the Pahlavi era, was one of the most progressive laws in the Muslim world regarding divorce and the age of marriage in favor of women, and Iranian women obtained the right to vote before they did in some European states, including Switzerland. In the field of arts, women often had more rights than men. The Iranian LGBT community also enjoyed significant freedoms and played an active role in the artistic field. For example, a year before the Islamic revolution in 1978, when the famous gay designer Bijan Safari got married, Empress Farah Pahlavi sent a bouquet of flowers on her behalf as congratulations.
In the past 15 years, the sense of Iranian patriotism has grown significantly, and nationalists have re-emerged as a central force in recent protests against the Islamic Republic. Since December 2017, Iran has witnessed five major nationwide uprisings during which people have widely chanted nationalist slogans. These slogans include: "From Kurdistan to Tehran, my life for Iran," "Reza Shah! Bless your soul," "Woman, Life, Freedom; Man, Homeland, Prosperity," "Sanandaj, Zahedan, the luminaries of Iran," "We fight, we die, we take back Iran," "Neither Gaza, nor Lebanon, my life for Iran," and "An Iranian dies but does not accept humiliation." These slogans reflect the spread of nationalist sentiment and patriotism among the Iranian people and their desire to preserve their national identity and the independence of their country.
In conclusion, Iranian patriotism, deeply rooted in a rich cultural and historical heritage, contrasts sharply with the often reductive and skewed portrayals found in Western media. This patriotism is marked by its defensive and inclusive nature, reflecting a nationalism that promotes unity and resists hostile pressures rather than fostering exclusion. By appreciating these nuances, the international community can engage in a more informed and respectful dialogue about Iran, recognizing its unique national identity and the aspirations of its people for freedom.
Executive editor Aliasghar Ramezanpoor and television host Pouria Zeraati accepted the Award on behalf of the news network.
“This is an award to Iranian people who are the voice of what is happening inside,” Zeraati said.
After receiving the award, Ramezanpoor and Zeraati spoke on a panel with Brandon Silver, Director of Policy and Projects at the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights (RWCHR).
During that conversation, they discussed Iran's grave humanitarian situation and why the Islamic Republic branded Iran International a terrorist organization.
“I think the reason the regime is against Iran International as a media organization is that they are afraid of the free flow of information, which cannot be stopped in the 21st century,” Zeraati said.
He explained the reason is twofold: the regime does not want people to know what they are deprived of, namely the social democratic values people desire, and it does not wish the rest of the world to know about the atrocities they commit inside their country.
Ramezanpoor drew attention to the grave situation of journalists inside Iran who bravely reported what was happening, particularly Elahe Mohamadi and Niloufar Hamedi, who broke the story of Mahsa Jina Amini for the first time.
22-year-old Mahsa Jina Amini died at the hands of the so-called morality police in September 2022. Her death sparked a monthslong nationwide protest, often dubbed the Woman, Life, Freedom movement, during which authorities killed at least 550 protesters and tens of thousands were detained – including scores of journalists.
The two female journalists were jailed for over a year for covering the death of Amini. While they were released on bail in January, they “technically are under house arrest and cannot do their work”, Ramzanpoor said.
During the panel discussion, Zeraati, who was stabbed while leaving his London residence in late March, said that what happened to him showed that the Western government's policy of diplomacy and negotiating with the regime doesn’t work.
“What they can do [the Western governments] is send a clear message to Tehran that if this is repeated, there will be severe and more serious consequences for you,” Zeraati said.
Pointing out to the sanctions the UK government imposed on the Islamic Republic after ITV revealed that there was a plot against two of Iran's International journalists that was foiled by British Security Services in 2022, Zeraati said: “What happened to me was about three months after those sanctions, That shows that those sanctions were not impactful enough.”
On the opening day of the summit, Zeraati also called for the designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a measure to reduce the regime’s international impact.
Iranian government threats have targeted Iran International for years. After risks to staff reached a point where domestic security services could not ensure their safety, the news network temporarily relocated its London offices to Washington last year.
During the summit, which raises awareness about human rights situations that require urgent global action, Kylie Moore-Gilbert, an academic previously jailed in Iran for over two years, described her harrowing ordeal inside the Islamic Republic's prisons.
She also called on Western governments to stop their “empty words” and take action to support Iranians.
Moore-Gilbert said that shortly after the 2022 Woman, Life, Freedom movement in Iran was suppressed by the authorities, Western governments “rushed right back into business as usual mode in their dealings with Tehran” and “turned a blind eye to enforcing oil sanctions. Unfreezing Iranian assets to the tune of billions, issuing sanctions waivers, which enrich the regime by further billions.”
The Australian-British academic was arrested at Tehran Airport by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) on September 12, 2018. She was subsequently convicted of espionage in a closed-door trial, and sentenced to 10 years in prison.
Moore-Gilbert, a University of Melbourne lecturer in Islamic studies, was released in November 2020 in a prisoner swap with three Iranian prisoners in Thailand, two of whom had been convicted in connection with a bombing plot in Bangkok in 2012.
She also criticized the UK, Canada, and Australia for not designating the IRGC as a terrorist entity, in its entirety.
“To the Western governments, I say it's not too late to stand by the Iranian people in a meaningful, impactful way in their quest for freedom. Woman Life Freedom is not over. It's still boiling away. It will erupt again, and when it does, we can be ready.”
US-based advocate Gazelle Sharmahd shared her speech via video after she was informed that the regime in Iran may target her should she travel to Switzerland for the summit.
Sharmahd, the daughter of German-American prisoner Jamshid Sharmahd, who has been sentenced to death in Iran, has long advocated for the release of her father.
“I wish I could be there with you today in person, but unfortunately, we live in a world where terrorists are invited on the red carpets and activists have to fend for their own lives. I was told it's not safe for me to travel because the Islamic regime is watching my every step, and I could be assassinated or kidnapped like my father.”
A 69-year-old California resident, Jamshid Sharmahd, was abducted by Iranian agents while visiting the United Arab Emirates in 2020. Iranian authorities sentenced him to death for “endangering national security” in February 2023, a verdict that the Supreme Court upheld.
Sharmahd, who holds German and Iranian citizenship, was convicted of heading a pro-monarchist group named Tondar, responsible for a deadly bomb attack that killed 14 people and injured 215 in Shiraz in 2008.
Sharmahd and his family deny the charges, and Iranian authorities have not provided evidence to support their accusations. Amnesty International has branded the Iranian judicial system’s trial a sham.
Gazelle Sharmahd also criticized Western governments for not supporting the Iranian diaspora, saying, “More activists and journalists are facing death threats as a nation plots kidnapping plots stabbings on American and European soil.”
“And when they ask their Western governments for protection, they're told to stop their activism. Don't go to rallies. Don't go to conferences or go into witness protection. So, in other words, shut up or protect yourself from terror plots,” Sharmahd added.
After establishing total control over the parliament by banning hundreds of other candidates, Iran’s hardliners are now engaged in fierce infighting, in what some observers call rivalry over power, money and influence.
Some argue that the infighting will not yield any clear winner, while others believe Iran's embattled ‘reform’ camp might benefit from the fierce competition among ultraconservatives, who still call themselves revolutionaries 45 years after Iran's largely forgotten 1979 revolution.
Meanwhile, the nation at large appeared indifferent to the entire affair, with various sources reporting a turnout of only 4 to 8 percent in the runoff election. The public nearly ignored the election and sees little significance in the infighting among the ultraconservatives poised to take over the inefficient parliament in less than a month.
Mohammad Javad Jamali Nobandegani, a conservative politician says there will be no winners in the infighting. He describes the ongoing conflict as a struggle between the younger members of the ultraconservative Paydari (Steadfastness) party and even younger "revolutionaries" who secured their seats in parliament through a campaign led by young conservative regime propagandist Ali Akbar Raefipour.
Both Paydari members and the supporters of Majles Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf have accused Raefipour of financial corruption and leading social media trolls to attack his political rivals, mainly on X.
Raefipour, on the other hand, has accused his political rivals of unethical campaigning against him. While Raefipour claims that nine of the candidates on his list have won the runoff election, others argue that none of the individuals won solely because of his support. The nine candidates were also promoted by Paydari Party.
Nobandegani told Nameh News that all radical politicians over the past 45 years have deviated from the orthodox Islamic revolution. He accused radical politicians of having very little, if any, political awareness and charged that young ultraconservatives know no boundaries in their mudslinging against political rivals.
He described the ultraconservatives' behavior as undemocratic and warned all sides that tarnishing their rivals' image will not boost their own reputation. On the contrary, it will deepen public disappointment and further lower voter turnout in the next elections. Both sides will be destroyed, he reiterated.
Nameh News warned in a commentary that reformist politicians are likely to ride the waves of discord among conservatives and become popular with the public.
The website noted that it is interesting how all sides, including Ghalibaf's camp, Paydari, and Raefipour with his young revolutionaries, claim to be pioneering a new brand of conservatism in Iran. However, what the public sees is their infighting and the corruption allegations they hurl at each other.
This, the website argued, will erode public trust in all politicians. The only potential winners might be the reformists, who can portray themselves as moderates among radicals.
Meanwhile, a moderate conservative commentator Mehdi Arab Sadeq has suggested that behind the scenes of the fierce infighting within the conservative camp, the Paydari Party appears to be trying to highlight the government's failures and further its own political agenda to take over the Majles and the government.
The Tehran University academic noted that while the new lawmakers are predominantly conservative, it is still too early to determine who holds the upper hand in parliament. Amid the initial chaos, Paydari members, many of whom have previously served in the Majles, are capitalizing on the new MPs' lack of experience to assert control over the parliament.
However, he added that Paydari's inherent weaknesses will become apparent in the coming months if their primary strategy is to fan the flames of discord and infighting. Despite these weaknesses, they may still manage to wrest control from President Raisi and advance their own political agenda.