Anti-Iranian sentiments

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series of articles on Discrimination

General forms Racism Sexism Ageism Religious intolerance Xenophobia

Specific forms Social Homophobia · Transphobia Ableism · Sizeism · Heightism · Adultism Misogyny · Misandry · Lookism Gerontophobia · Classism · Elitism

Against cultures: Americans Arabs Armenians Canadians Chinese Europeans Croats French Germans Greeks Indians Iranians Italians Japanese Polish Quebecers Roma Russians Serbs Turks

Against religions: Catholics Christians Hindus Jews Mormons Muslims Protestants

Manifestations Slavery · Racial profiling · Lynching Hate speech · Hate crime · Hate groups Genocide · Holocaust · Pogrom Ethnocide · Ethnic cleansing · Race war Religious persecution · Gay bashing Pedophobia · Ephebiphobia

Movements Discriminatory Aryanism · Neo-Nazism · Supremacism Kahanism Anti-discriminatory Abolitionism · Civil rights · Gay rights Women's/Universal suffrage · Men's rights Children's rights · Youth rights Disability rights · Inclusion Social model of disability · Autistic rights

Policies Discriminatory Segregation: Racial/Ethnic/Religious/Sexual Apartheid · Redlining · Internment Anti-discriminatory Emancipation · Civil rights · Desegregation Integration · Reservation · Reparations Affirmative action · Racial quota

Law Discriminatory Anti-miscegenation · Anti-immigration Alien and Sedition Acts · Nuremberg Laws Jim Crow laws · Black codes · Apartheid laws Anti-discriminatory List of anti-discrimination acts

Other forms Nepotism · Cronyism Colorism · Linguicism Ethnocentrism · Triumphalism Adultcentrism · Isolationism Economic discrimination

Related topics Prejudice · Supremacism · Intolerance Tolerance · Diversity · Multiculturalism Political correctness · Reverse discrimination Eugenics · Racialism This box: view • talk • edit

Anti-Iranian sentiments (ایرانی ستیزی also ایران ستیزی) are feelings of hostility, hatred, or prejudice against Iran, its citizens, or the Persian people.

Contents 1 Definitions and usage 2 In early times 2.1 The Greeks and Romans 3 By pan-Turkists 4 By Arabs 4.1 "Ajam" 4.2 Anti-Iranianism in early Islam 4.2.1 By sources 4.2.2 References in Persian literature 4.2.2.1 Persian language suppressed 4.2.3 Shi'ism and Iranians 4.3 Modern times 4.3.1 The Iran-Iraq war 4.3.2 The Persian Gulf dispute 4.3.3 Claims of Arab historical revisionism 4.3.4 Other Arab states 5 In the United States 5.1 Anti-Iranian sentiments in the media 5.2 Hollywood Depiction of Persians (Iranians) 5.2.1 Not Without My Daughter 5.2.2 Alexander 5.2.3 300 6 References 7 See also 8 Links

[edit] Definitions and usage

Prior to 1935, "Iran" was called "Persia" by Western nations, and "Iranians" referred to as "Persians" (as for example the Safavid Azeris were referred to as "Persian").^[1]

For a more lengthy discussion on the particular ethnic groups, see the articles Anti-Arabism and Anti-Turkism.

[edit] In early times

[edit] The Greeks and Romans

See Roman relations with the Parthians and Sassanians

The term "barbarian" was used by the Greeks to refer to those that were "not Greek". Initially, they did not despise alien cultures. In fact, they were aware of the greater antiquity of the much more developed civilizations of Egypt, Phoenicia^[2], Mesopotamia, and Persia^[3] from whom they borrowed extensively.

A change however occurred in the connotations of the word after the Greco-Persian Wars in the first half of the 5th century BC. Here a hasty coalition of Greeks defeated a vast Persian empire, who they considered to be barbarians.^[4] In the wake of this victory, the Greeks began to be seen as superior militarily and politically. A stereotype developed in which hardy Greeks live as free men in city-states where politics are a communal possession, whereas among the barbarians everyone beneath the Great King is no better than his slave. This marks the birth of the cultural view termed "orientalism".

The Greeks under Alexander the Great invaded and conquered the entire Persian Empire adding it to the Macedonian Empire. After the abrupt death of Alexander, parts of the former Persian Empire were partitioned among his generals, one of which was Seleucus. Seleucus and his descendants ruled over Persia from 323 to 60 BC finally being overthrown by the Parthians, a satrap of the Seleucid Empire that declared and maintained its independance from 250 b.c to 224 a.d. After the collapse of the Seleucid Empire due to a weakend internal state caused by revolt and a Roman invasion, the Parthian Empire was able to assimilate much of the former Seluecid territory. The Parthians went on to being one of the main world centers of power, and a constant adversary to Rome, see: "Roman relations with the Parthians and Sassanians". By 224 a.d. the Parthian Empire had become weakened to the point of collapse and takeover by another Iranian people, from the heartland of Pars, known as the Sassanians.

The Romans and Persians were frequently hostile to one another and were often at war with one another between 90 BC and 672 AD. The borders between the two remained relatively static except for Mesopotamia which switched hands several times but was under Sassanid and Parthian rule for most of the time.

• Persepolis Recreated - Movie about The real Persian Empire and Culture * HOT *

[edit] By pan-Turkists

Pan-Turkists and their supporters are active in the area of history revisionism, especially when it comes to the history of Iran.^[5] See Dr. Kaveh Farrokh's article on pan-Turkist revisions and attacks against Iran. They are also involved in creating civil unrest in Iranian Azerbaijan.

Iran's Minister of Culture Hossein Saffar Harandi has called the disrespect to the Persian Shahnameh by some Pan-Turkists, as the "introduction to Anti-Iranianism".^[6]

[edit] By Arabs

Anti-Ajam sentiments (عجم ستیزی) also (ایرانی ستیزی) is a phenomenon that first rose among victorious Arabs during the Islamic Conquest of Persia, in particular the Umayyid era. It also surfaced once again during the 20th century when Gamal Abdel Nasser championed Pan-Arab nationalist views as a political tool.^{[citation needed]}

Samir el-Khalil has attacked pan-Arab chauvinism and has reminded Arabs of the legacy of Persia in their culture as well as in Islam. Khalil was for years a hunted man by the Saddam Hussein regime.^{[citation needed]} The late Arab scholar, George Hourani, not only appreciated the Iranians for their role in helping the Arabs form their civilization, but was rigorous against politically motivated attempts to re-name the Persian Gulf as the "Arab Gulf".^{[citation needed]} And Richard Nelson Frye regarding this matter unequivocally stated that:

"Arabs no longer understand the role of Iran and the Persian language in the formation of Islamic culture. Perhaps they wish to forget the past, but in so doing they remove the bases of their own spiritual, moral and cultural being…without the heritage of the past and a healthy respect for it…there is little chance for stability and proper growth." ^[7]

Many Arabs disregard the anti-non Arab sentiments exhibited by some. And many Iraqis have even dismantled Saddam's anti-Iran propaganda props from their streets and monuments after the US invasion - this was done in order to destroy Saddam's legacy of hate against Iran.

The anti-Iranianism exhibited by the Arabs has varying degrees and can be investigated from several different angles that will now follow.

[edit] "Ajam"

According to Encyclopedia Iranica, the word "ajam", in Arabic "is applied especially to Persians" and means "to mumble, and speak indistinctly"^[8], which is the opposite of the meaning of speaking "chaste and correct Arabic language."^[9]

"The distinction of Arab and Ajam is already discernible in pre- and early Islamic literature Cf. the Ajam Temtemī ("stuttering barbarian")." ^[10] (also mentioned in ^[11])

"In general, ajam was a pejorative term, used by Arabs because of their contrived social and political superiority in early Islam."^[12]

Dehkhoda Dictionary also verifies this, stating the meaning as "one who mumbles" (کند زبانان). For another detailed discourse on this subject see:

• Ignaz Goldziher, 'Arab und 'Agam. Muhammedanische Studien I. Halle. 1889-1890. I p.101. tr. London 1967-1971, I, p.98 C. E. Bosworth.

[edit] Anti-Iranianism in early Islam

[edit] By sources

Patrick Clawson states that "The Iranians chafed under Umayyid rule. The Umayyids rose from traditional Arab aristocracy. They tended to marry other Arabs, creating an ethnic stratification that discriminated against Iranians. Even as Arabs adopted traditional Iranian bureaucracy, Arab tribalism disadvantaged Iranians."^[13]

The conquest of Persia and beyond was thus seemingly intended to raise new revenues, and the native population naturally did not appreciate this exploitation. Many Arab Muslims believed that Iranian converts should not clothe themselves as Arabs, among many other forms discrimination that existed.^[14]

The inhumane treatment of Iranians by the victorious Arab forces are also documented. See:^[15]

Mu'awiyah, in a famous letter addressed to Ziyad ibn Abih, the then governor of Iraq, wrote:

Be watchful of Iranian Muslims and never treat them as equals of Arabs. Arabs have a right to take in marriage their women, but they have no right to marry Arab women. Arabs are entitled to inherit their legacy, but they cannot inherit from an Arab. As far as possible they are to be given lesser pensions and lowly jobs. In the presence of an Arab a non-Arab shall not lead the congregation prayer, nor they are to be allowed to stand in the first row of prayer, nor to be entrusted with the job of guarding the frontiers or the post of a qadi.

Mistreatment of Persians and other non-Arabs during early Islam is well documented. To begin with, the Umayyids did not recognize equal rights of a Mawali, and believed that only "pure Arab blood" was worthy of ruling. ^[16] Neither did they make any effort to mend relations with the Mawali after making declarations like:

"We blessed you with the sword (referring to the conquests) and dragged you into heaven by chains of our religion. This by itself is enough for you to understand that we are superior to you." ^[17]

Many similar norms have been reported in various sources:

"The Mawali were not allowed to lead the prayers or receive booty even if they had participated in battles and distinguished themselves. They were not allowed to ride horses, marry into Arab families, or administer governmental or religious affairs. Even the offspring of mixed marriages were not exempt. The Mawali did not have the right to walk alongside an Arab; if a Mawali met an Arab carrying a load, he had to carry that load to the Arab's home without expecting any payment. If a Mawali were riding a horse and saw an Arab, he had to dismount and allow the Arab to ride instead. In fact, he had to take the Arab to his destination. Furthermore, the Mawali did not have the right to marry their daughters without prior permission from their Arab masters. Even in death rituals, there was a distinction. As a rule, Arabs did not participate in funerals held for the Mawali and the Mawali were not allowed to perform funeral prayers for a deceased Arab."[8]

The Umayyid Arabs are even reported to have prevented the Mawali from having surnames, as an Arab was only considered worthy of a surname.^[18] They were required to pay taxes for not being an Arab:

"During the early centuries of Islam when the Islamic empire was really an 'Arab kingdom', the Iranians, Central Asians and other non-Arab peoples who had converted to Islam in growing numbers as mawali, or 'clients' of an Arab lord or clan, had in practice acquired an inferior socio-economic and racial status compared to Arab Muslims, though the mawali themselves fared better than the empire's non-Muslim subjects, the ahl al-dhimma ('people of the book'). The mawali, for instance, paid special taxes, often similar to the jizya (poll tax) and the kharaj (land tax) levied on the Zoroastrians and other non-Muslim subjects, taxes which were never paid by the Arab Muslims."[9]

[edit] References in Persian literature

Zarrinkoub presents a lengthy discussion on the large flux and influence of the victorious Arabs on the literature, language, culture, and society of Persia during the two centuries following the Islamic conquest of Iran in his book "Two Centuries of Silence"^[19].

As an example, he recounts the following from the writings of the calamities from the time:

که رود و بگوید به هندوان
"Who will go and tell the Indians
که ما چه دیدیم از دست تازیان
what misfortune these Arabs have brought upon us?
با یک گروه دین خویش پراکندند و برفت
They came and brought their faith upon us,
شاهنشاهی ما به سبب ایشان
they came and brought death to our kingdom
نه به هنر نه به مردی بلکه به افسوس و ریشخند
Not by genuine effort, nor by fortitude and forthright, but by mockery and transgression.
بستدند به ستم از مردمان
They took away by force from the people,
زن وخواسته شیرین, باغ و بوستان
sweet desires, gardens and property.
جزیه بر نهادند و پخش کردند بر سران
A tax levied on us they did.
بنگر تا چه بدی در افکند این دروغ به کیهان
Look at what evil this calamity brought the world,
که نیست بدتر از آن چیزی به جهان
For nothing worse than it has this world seen yet."^[20]

[edit] Persian language suppressed

After the Islamic conquest of the Persian Empire, during the reign of the Ummayad dynasty, the Arab conquerors imposed Arabic as the primary language of the subject peoples throughout their empire. Hajjāj ibn Yusuf, who was not happy with the prevalence of the Persian language in the divan, ordered the official language of the conquered lands to be replaced by Arabic, sometimes by force. ^[21]

In Biruni's From The Remaining Signs of Past Centuries (الآثار الباقية عن القرون الخالية), for example it is written:

وقتی قتبیه بن مسلم سردار حجاج، بار دوم بخوارزم رفت و آن را باز گشود هرکس را که خط خوارزمی می نوشت و از تاریخ و علوم و اخبار گذشته آگاهی داشت از دم تیغ بی دریغ درگذاشت و موبدان و هیربدان قوم را یکسر هلاک نمود و کتابهاشان همه بسوزانید و تباه کرد تا آنکه رفته رفته مردم امی ماندند و از خط و کتابت بی بهره گشتند و اخبار آنها اکثر فراموش شد و از میان رفت

"When Qutaibah bin Muslim under the command of Al-Hajjaj bin Yousef was sent to Khwarazmia with a military expedition and conquered it for the second time, he swiftly killed whomwever wrote the Khwarazmian native language that knew of the Khwarazmian history, science, and culture. He then killed all their Zoroastrian priests and burned and wasted their books, until gradually the illiterate only remained, who knew nothing of writing, and hence their history was mostly forgotten." ^[22]

It is difficult to imagine the Arabs not implementing anti-Persian policies in light of such events, writes Zarrinkoub in his famous Two Centuries of Silence ^[23], where he exclusively writes of this topic. Reports of Persian speakers being tortured are also given in al-Aghānī^[24].

[edit] Shi'ism and Iranians

Predominantly Shia Iran has always exhibited a sympathetic side for Ali and his progeny. Even when Persia was largely Sunni, this was still evident as can be seen from the writings remaining from that era. Rumi for example, praises Ali (in a section entitled "Learn from Ali"), which recounts Ali ibn Abi Talib's explanation as to why he declined to kill someone who had spit in his face as Ali was defeating him in battle. Persian literature in praise of Ali's progeny is quite ubiquitous and abundant. These all stem from numerous traditions regarding Ali's favor of Persians being as equals to Arabs.

In Bihar ul Anwar (vol.9, bab 124), a tradition quoted from Usul al-Kafi reads:

"One day a group of the Mawali (Iranian clients of Arab tribes) came to Amir al-Mu'minin 'Ali and complained about the conduct of the Arabs. They said to him that the Messenger of God did not make any distinction between Arabs and non-Arabs in the disbursement of public funds (bayt ul-mal) or in the matter of marriage. They added that the Prophet distributed public funds equally among Muslims and let Salman, Bilal and Suhayb marry Arab women, but today Arabs discriminated between themselves and us. 'Ali went to the Arabs and discussed the matter with them, but it was to no avail. The Arabs shouted, "It is quite impossible! Impossible! "'All, annoyed and angered by this turn of affairs, returned to the Mawali and told them with utmost regret, "They are not prepared to treat you equally and as Muslims enjoying equal rights. I advise you to go into trade and God will make you prosper."

Several sources speak of a dispute arising between an Arab and an Iranian woman. Referring the case to Ali for arbitration, Ali reportedly did not allow any discrimination between the two to take place. His judgment thus invited the protest of the Arab woman. Thereupon, Ali replied: "In the Quran, I did not find the progeny of Ishmael (the Arabs) to be any higher than the Iranians."^[25]

Again, Ali was once reciting a sermon in the city of Kufah, when Ash'as ibn Qays, a commander in the Arab army protested: "Amir-al-Momeneen! These Iranians are excelling the Arabs right in front of your eyes, and you are doing nothing about it!" He then roared: "I, will show them who the Arabs are!"

Ali immediately retorted: "While fat Arabs rest in soft beds, the Iranians work hard on the hottest days to please God with their efforts. And what do these Arabs want from me? To ostracize the Iranians and become an oppressor! I swear by the God that splits the nucleus and creates Man, I heard the prophet once say: Just as you strike the Iranians with your swords in the name of Islam, so will the Iranians one day strike you back the same way, for Islam." ^[26]

When the Sassanid city of Anbar fell to the forces of Mu'awiyeh, news reached Ali that the city had been sacked and plundered spilling much innocent blood. Ali gathered all the people of Kufah to the mosque, and gave a fiery sermon. After describing the massacre, he said: "If somebody, hearing this news now faints and dies of grief, I fully approve of it!" ^[27] It is from here that Ali is said to have had more sympathy for Iranians while Omar highly resented them.^[28]

The following traditions are also recorded in Safinat al-Bihar ^[29]:

Mughirah, comparing Ali with 'Umar, always used to say, " 'Ali showed greater consideration and kindness to the Mawali, while 'Umar, on the contrary, did not like them."

A man came to Ja'far al-Sadiq and said, "People say that one who is neither a pure Arab nor a pure mawla is of base origin." The Imam asked him, "What do you mean by 'pure mawla'?" The man replied, "It is a person whose parents were slaves earlier." The Imam asked again, "What is the merit in being a pure mawla?" The man answered, "That is because the Prophet said that a people's mawla is from themselves. Therefore, a pure mawla of Arabs is like Arabs. Hence the man of merit is one who is either a pure Arab or a pure mawla associated with Arabs." The Imam replied, "Haven't you heard that the Prophet declared that he was the wali (guardian) of those who have no wali? Didn't he also say, 'I am the wali of every Muslim, whether he be Arab or non-Arab'? And doesn't a person whose wali is the Prophet therefore belong to the Prophet?" He then added: "Of these two which is superior: the one who is related to the Prophet and is from him or the one related to a boorish Arab who urinates over his feet?" Then he said: "One who embraces Islam out of his free choice, willingly is far more superior to him who has embraced Islam due to fear. These hypocritical Arabs were converted to Islam because of fear, while the Iranians came to the fold of Islam willingly and with pleasure.

However, the viewpoint that Ali has always "loved" Iran has been disputed. There is evidence that these claims have been exaggerated to increase sympathy and loyalty for the Shia faith, instigated by the modern clercial institution of Iran. In addition, Al-Tabari's accounts are blantantly contradictory. Al-Tabari records that when the citizens of Pars and Kerman revolted, Ali sent in a large army by the name of "Ziyad" to put down the revolt of the "accursed Iranians"^[30]. However, this tradition lacks its authenticity owing to many monumental historical accounts written by both Sunni and non-Muslim historians which portray Ali as a paragon of Islamic equality and nobility.^{[verification needed]}

[edit] Modern times

It was in Baghdad where the first Arab nationalists, mainly of Palestinian and Syrian descent, formed the basis of their overall philosophies. Prominent among them were individuals such as Mohammad Amin al-Husayni (the Mufti of Jerusalem), and Syrian nationalists such as Shukri al-Quwatli and Jamil Mardam. Satia Al-Husri, who served as advisor to the Ministry of Education; and later Director General of Education, and Dean of the College of Law was particularly instrumental in shaping the Iraqi educational system. Other prominent Pan-Arabists were Michel Aflaq,Khairallah Talfah, as well as Sati' al-Husri, Salah al-Din al-Bitar, Zaki al-Arsuzi, and Sami Shwkat (brother of Naji Shawkat). These individuals formed the nucleus and genesis of true pan-Arabism, and unfortunately, ushered in the basis of anti-Iranian thinking in mainstream Arab education and mass media.

Anti-Persian thinking can be seen in the result of Satia Al-Husri.[10] Of special interest is one of Husri's works entitled "Iranian Teachers who caused Us (Arabs) Big Problems". His campaigns against schools suspected of being positive towards Persia are well documented. One dramatic example is found in the 1920s when the Iraqi Ministry of Education ordered Husri to appoint Muhammad Al-Jawahiri as a teacher in a Baghdad school. A short excerpt of Husri's interview with the teacher is revealing (^[31]):

"Husri: First, I want to know your nationality.

Jawahiri: I am an Iranian.

Husri: In that case we cannot appoint you."
[11]

Husri was eventually overruled by the Iraqi ministry and Jawahiri was appointed instead. Jawahiri was in fact an Arab. Yet like many Arabs of his day and the present, Jawahiri saw no reason to follow Husri's bigoted anti-Iranian racialism. (see source)

It is known that Saddam Hussein Al Majid Al Tikriti forced out thousands of people of Persian origin from Iraq in the 1970s, after having been accused of being spies for Iran and Israel. Today, many of them live in Iran.

[edit] The Iran-Iraq war

Early on in his career, Saddam Hussein and pan-Arab ideologues targeted the Arabs of southwest Iran in an endeavour to have them separate and join “the Arab nation”. Saddam made no effort to conceal Arab Nationalism in his war against Iran (which he called "the second Battle of al-Qādisiyyah). An intense campaign of propaganda during his reign meant that many school children were taught that Iran provoked Iraq into invading and that the invasion was fully justified. Saddām on numerous occasions alluded to the Islamic conquest of Iran in propagating his anti-Persian position against Iran.^{[citation needed]} For example, on 02 April 1980, a half-year before the outbreak of the war, in a visit by Saddām to al-Mustansiriyyah University in Baghdad, drawing parallels to the 7th-Century defeat of Persia in the Battle of al-Qādisiyyah he announced:

"In your name, brothers, and on behalf of the Iraqis and Arabs everywhere we tell those [Persian] cowards and dwarfs who try to avenge Al-Qadisiyah that the spirit of Al-Qadisiyah as well as the blood and honor of the people of Al-Qadisiyah who carried the message on their spearheads are greater than their attempts." ^[32]

Saddam also accused Iranians of "murdering the second (Umar), third (Uthman), and fourth (Ali) Caliphs of Islam", invading the three islands of Abu Musa and Greater and Lesser Tunbs in the "Arabic Gulf", and attempting to destroy the Arabic language and civilization. ^[33]

Saddam was ideologically backed by his Arab brethren. King Khalid of Saudi Arabia for example wrote to Saddam to "crush these stupid Iranians" (این ایرانیهای احمق را له کنید) as Saddam pushed on with the invasion of Iranian territory.[12] It has often been claimed that Iraq recruited non-Iraqi Arabs during the war to balance the far superior number of Iranian forces on the ground.^[34]

In December 2006, Sadam Hussein said he would take responsibility "with honour" for any attacks on Iran using conventional or chemical weapons during the 1980-1988 war but he took issue with charges he ordered attacks on Iraqis.^[35][36]

On the execution day, Saddam Hussein said: "I spent my whole life fighting the infidels and the intruders [...] I destroyed the invaders and the Persians". He also stressed that the Iraqis should fight the Americans and the Persians.^[37] Mowaffak al Rubiae, Iraq's National Security adviser, who was a witness to Saddam's execution described Saddam as repeatedly shouting "down with Persians."^[38]

[edit] The Persian Gulf dispute

Main article: Persian Gulf naming dispute

Starting 1960s, following Charles Belgrave who first coined the phrase [13], some Arab states started referring to Persian Gulf as the "Arabian Gulf". However, in 1952, after the confiscation of British Petroleum properties by the Iranian government, the title "Arabian Gulf" was also suggested by BP. Roderic Owen (a British representative in the then colonialized Emirates) for the first time put this suggestion in his book The Golden Bubble of the Arabian Gulf^[39]. His suggestion was then disseminated by the BBC, to find its way to a nationalist Arab audience. In Iran, this continues to be seen as an act of anti-Iranianism by Arabs. Since then the disputed over the name of the gulf has been one of the most heated discussions and among Iranians it is considered to be a sign of Arabs dislike of them.

Another aspect of this dispute aside from the naming of the Persian Gulf can be seen in cultural relations between Iran and the Arab states. One notable example was the 2002 World Cup qualifiers. Bahrain, which had no hopes of qualifying, managed to upset the group top-seed Iran 3-1 in their home turf. What was interesting was that a victory for Bahrain would not qualify Bahrain but would eliminate Iran and instead enable runner-up Saudi Arabia (which had lost to Iran) to qualify.

Iranian viewers were stunned when Bahraini fans and players after the game started waving the flag of Saudi Arabia (instead of their own national flag) declaring their victory over Iran as a "gift" to Saudi Arabia. [14] Riots broke out in Tehran [15] and angry racial exchanges broke out over the internet with Iranians accusing Bahrainis of being a sell-out, and playing for the Saudis instead of playing for themselves [16]. Numerous petitions and protests to the Asian Football Confederation followed in the succeeding months.[17]

[edit] Claims of Arab historical revisionism

Another point of friction that often stirs much animosity is the ongoing wave by some Arab authors and historians that continue to claim Persian scientists as Arab in their writings. For example, Ahmed al-Jabbar, the Algerian ex-Minister of Culture, in his book "the history of Arabic knowledge", has a list of 150 "Arab" historians such as Jamshid Kashani that have been Arabized as "al-Kashani", with no credit whatsoever given even to the name "Persia" or "Iran". On April 22 2006, in a lecture organized by L'Institut du Monde Arabe in Paris on the same topic, Jabbar's lecture was met with stiff criticism by Persian protesters among the audience. ^[40] The event has led to protests in the Iranian press.

[edit] Other Arab states

Some Arab states show hostility to Iran. Within Saudi Arabia, for example, anti-Iranian rhetoric is openly gathering strength. As an example, al-Salafi magazine, quoted in The New York Times, states: "Iran has become more dangerous than Israel itself. The Iranian revolution has come to renew the Persian presence in our region. This is the real clash of civilisations."^[41]

In January 2007, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah said that attempts to convert Muslim Sunnis to the Shiite branch of Islam will not succeed, and that Sunnis would always make up the majority of the world Muslims. Although Abdullah did not mention Iran by name, his comments appeared aimed at easing Arab concerns over the Persian Shiite nation's growing influence in the Middle East. "We are following up on this matter and we are aware of the dimensions of spreading Shiism and where it has reached," Abdullah told the Kuwaiti Al-Siyassah daily. "However, we believe that this process will not achieve its goal because the majority of Sunni Muslims will never change their faith," he added. Ultimately, "the majority of Muslims seem immune to any attempts by other sects to penetrate it (Sunnism) or diminish its historical power." While there have been no specific examples of Iranians trying to convert Sunnis, Arabs fear such conversions would accompany Iran's growing powers.^[42]

[edit] In the United States

The November 1979 Iranian hostage crisis of the U.S. embassy in Tehran precipitated a wave of anti-Iranian sentiment in the United States, directed both against the new Islamic regime and Iranian nationals and immigrants. And even though such sentiments gradually declined after the release of the hostages at the start of 1981, they sometimes flare up. In response, some Iranian immigrants to the U.S. (such as Armenian-Iranians and Bahá'ís) have distanced themselves from their nationality and instead identify primarily on the basis of their ethnic or religious affiliations.^[43]

[edit] Anti-Iranian sentiments in the media

While many media commentators chide the lack to ascribe "anything but the purest of motives" to Iranians in the media since September 11, 2001^[44], anti-Iranian sentiments are moreorless visible in the mainstream media nevertheless. Among the celebrities in the media that have openly advocated "bombing Iran" are Donald Trump^[45] and the Beach Boys from their 1979 hit song "Bomb Bomb Iran". Their hit song continues to reverberate today with the possible military US threat against Iran nearing (videolink), with the internet showing no shortage of such sentiments.[18][19][20][21]. Ann Coulter went even as far as calling Iran's president a "Jihad monkey"^[46], and advocating an invasion of Iran^[47], while calling Iranians "ragheads"^[48]. And Jonathan Hoenig of Fox News participated in a roundtable discussion on June 5, 2006, where he even suggested to bomb Iran merely in order to help improve the stock market:

"I think when it comes to Iran the problem is we haven't been foreceful enough. Frankly, if you want to see the Dow go up, let's get the bombers in the air and neutralize this Iranian threat. We've gone to the negotiating table, we've danced around with these people and that's not going to help this country nor this stock market."[22]

[edit] Hollywood Depiction of Persians (Iranians)

Since the 1980s, and especially since the 1990s, Hollywood's depiction of Iranians has gradually shown signs of villainizing Iranians.^[49] Hollywood network productions such as 24 ^[50], John Doe, On Wings of Eagles (1986)^[51], Escape From Iran: The Canadian Caper (1981)^[52], and JAG almost regularly host Persian speaking villains in their storylines. In fact, on Friday, May 9, 1997, CBS aired an episode of JAG in which several Hamas terrorists take a Washington hospital under siege. According to the film, they spoke in fluent "Farsi" (or Persian), not "Arabic".

According to Kaveh Afrasiabi:

"Hollywood's tall walls of exclusion and discrimination have yet to crumble when it comes to the movie industry's persistent misrepresentation of Iranians and their collective identity immersed in a long thread of history."^[53]

Some of Hollywood's "stereotypical"^[54] and anti-Iranian movies include: The Peacemaker (in which a character, apparently without any context, says "fuck Iran"), The Hitman (in which several mobs join together to demolish an Iranian mob operating in Canada), MadHouse (partially centering upon a wealthy Iranian who is in the process of divorcing his American wife. In one scene, the wife, speaking to her Iranian husband utters "you goddamn towel heads, sand rats"), The Naked Gun, Under Siege, The Delta Force, Into the Night (1985), Down and Out in Beverly Hills (1985), Threads (1984), The Final Options (1983), and Silver Bears (1978).

Among the more recent and controversial films are Not Without My Daughter, Alexander, and 300.

[edit] Not Without My Daughter

The 1991 film Not Without My Daughter was widely criticized for its portrayal of Iranian society. The film is based on the true story of Betty Mahmoody, an American woman who traveled to Tehran with her young daughter to visit her Iranian-born husband's family. In the film, which was partly filmed in Israel, Mahmoody's husband undergoes a transformation in Iran. He becomes increasingly angry and abusive and eventually decides that he will not return to the United States. Betty is told that she can leave, but the couple's daughter will have to stay in Tehran. Ultimately, after 18 months in Iran, Betty and her daughter escape to the United States.

Several Western critics, including Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun Times and Caryn James of The New York Times, criticized the film for stereotyping Iranians as misogynistic and fanatical. According to Ebert, the film depicts Islamic society "in shrill terms", where women are "willing or unwilling captives of their men", deprived "of what in the West would be considered basic human rights". Further, Ebert says: "No attempt is made - deliberately, I assume - to explain the Muslim point of view, except in rigid sets of commands and rote statements."^[55][56] Ebert then contends:

“

If a movie of such a vitriolic and spiteful nature were to be made in America about any other ethnic group, it would be denounced as racist and prejudiced.[57]

”

According to Jane Campbell, the film

“

...only serves to reinforce the media stereotype of Iranians as terrorists who, if not actively bombing public buildings or holding airline passengers hostage, are untrustworthy, irrational, cruel, and barbaric.[58].

”

The film was also criticized in Iran. A 2002 Islamic Republic News Agency article claimed that the film made "[made] smears... against Iran" and "stereotyped Iranians as cruel characters and wife-beaters". In a Finnish documentary, Without My Daughter^[59], film maker Alexis Kouros tells Mahmoody's husband's side of the story, showing Iranian eyewitnesses accusing the Hollywood film of spreading lies and "treasons". Alice Sharif, an American woman living with her Iranian husband in Tehran, accuses Mahmoody and the filmmakers of deliberately attempting to foment anti-Iranian sentiment in America.^[60][61]

[edit] Alexander

The 2004 film Alexander, by American director Oliver Stone, has been accused of negative and inaccurate portrayal of Persians.^[62][63] In the movie the Persians are portrayed as poor, gay, barbaric farmers that spend their time killing innocent neighbors. The movie was banned in Iran and some Arabic nations but the movie still circulates in the Iranian black market.

[edit] 300

The 2007 film 300, an adaptation of Frank Miller's 1998 graphic novel, was widely criticized for its "racist"^[65] portrayal of Persian combatants at the Battle of Thermopylae. Reviewers in the United States and elsewhere "noted the political overtones of the West-against-Iran story line – and the way Persians are depicted as decadent, sexually flamboyant and evil in contrast to the noble Greeks."^[66] With bootleg versions of the film already available in Tehran with the film's international release and news of the film's surprising success at the American box office prompted widespread anger in that country.^[66] Azadeh Moaveni of Time reported: "All of Tehran was outraged. Everywhere I went yesterday, the talk vibrated with indignation over the film..."^[67] Newspapers in Iran featured headlines such as "Hollywood declares war on Iranians" and "300 AGAINST 70 MILLION" (Iran's population). Ayende-No, an independent Iranian newspaper, said that "[t]he film depicts Iranians as demons, without culture, feeling or humanity, who think of nothing except attacking other nations and killing people"^[66][67] Four Iranian Members of Parliament have called for Muslim countries to ban the film^[68], and a group of Iranian film makers have submitted a letter of protest to UNESCO regarding the film's alleged misrepresentation of Iranian history and culture.^[69] Iran's cultural advisor to president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called the film an "American attempt for psychological warfare against Iran".^[70]

Moaveni identified two factors which may have contributed to the intensity of Iranian indignation over the film. First, she describes the timing of the film's release, on the eve of Norouz, the Persian New Year, as "inauspicious". Second, Iranians tend to view the era depicted in the film as "a particularly noble page in their history." Moaveni also suggests that "the box office success of 300, compared with the relative flop of Alexander (another spurious period epic dealing with Persians) is cause for considerable alarm, signaling ominous U.S. intentions."^[67]

According to The Guardian, Iranian critics of 300, ranging from bloggers to government officials, have described the movie "as a calculated attempt to demonise Iran at a time of intensifying US pressure over the country's nuclear programme."^[68] An Iranian government spokesman described the film as "hostile behavior which is the result of cultural and psychological warfare."^[68] Moaveni reported that the Iranians she interacted with were "adamant that the movie was secretly funded by the U.S. government to prepare Americans for going to war against Iran.^[67]

Dana Stevens of Slate states:

“

If 300, the new battle epic based on the graphic novel by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley, had been made in Germany in the mid-1930s, it would be studied today alongside The Eternal Jew as a textbook example of how race-baiting fantasy and nationalist myth can serve as an incitement to total war. Since it's a product of the post-ideological, post-Xbox 21st century, 300 will instead be talked about as a technical achievement, the next blip on the increasingly blurry line between movies and video games. [23]

”

Some in the U.S. view the outrage as ridiculous considering the age of the graphic novel the film mirrors almost panel for panel and a lack of connection in the minds of most Americans between the Persian Empire and the current Islamic republic. The Greeks in the film were also portrayed as less than noble themselves (see opening scene).

[edit] References

[edit] See also

• Persecution of Zoroastrians
• Greater Iran
• Iranology
• Anti-Arabism
• Iran-Arab relations
• Islamic conquest of Persia
• 1987 massacre of Iranian pilgrims
• Iranian Embassy Siege by Iraqi terrorists
• Mawali
• List of anti-ethnic and anti-national terms
• Ajam
• Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies

[edit] Links

• More muslim than others?
• Baztab Daily Paper: "$10 million budget given to al-Qua'eda for destablizing Khuzestan (in Persian)
• Baztab reports on Al-Jazeera broadcasting fabricated lies to urge Arabs in Iran to uprise (in Persian)
• Islam and Iran: A historical study of mutual services
• What is the Shu'ubiyah movement? (in Persian)
• Pan Arabists confrontation with Iran (in English) (in Persian)
• How Arabs demonize Iranians in their textbooks. This is a translated excerpt in Persian of (the Arab) Tallal Etrisi's work in: Arab-Iranian Relations, edited by: Khair El-Din Haseeb. 1998. ISBN 1-86064-156-3 [24]
• Iranian-American Student Abused By UCLA UCPD With Tazer GUN(by BBC Persian)
• Culture and attitudes of Iranians (BBC persian)
• "Anti-Iranianism and the Persian language identity of the Tajiks"(in Persian)
• Anti-Iranian Propaganda Ads on CNN
• Persepolis Recreated - Movie about The real Persian Empire and Culture * HOT *