By Ahmad Hashemi, IranWire – February 24, 2015
 |
| Tabriz, Azerbaijan: Tractor Football Club fans holding a placard: "Education in Turkish should be a right for all." |
This year, February 21, designated by UNESCO as "International Mother Language Day," once again elicited diverse reactions from Iranian society. On one side, non-Persian-speaking cultural activists used this occasion to voice their grievances and advocate for lifting restrictions on mother-tongue education. On the other, some Persian-speaking intellectuals opposed the concept of mother tongue education, portraying it as a sign of backwardness, tribalism, and ethnocentrism. Meanwhile, the Iranian government arrested several ethnic cultural activists who insisted on commemorating this day.
In democratic societies, issues such as children's right to education in their mother tongue, multilingual education, and the freedom to choose the language of instruction are legally guaranteed. However, in Iran, even many intellectuals and elites do not consider education in non-Persian languages either necessary or beneficial. Various arguments and justifications are presented at the governmental level and among Iranian elites. Here, we examine five common arguments against mother tongue education (with a focus on Turkish language in this discussion):
 |
| Ahmad Hashemi, former employee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran |
1. Local languages are primitive and undeveloped!
One of the common arguments by opponents of non-Persian language education, dismissively referred to as "local languages," is that these languages, such as Turkish, are incomplete and lack a rich, established literary tradition. Critics claim that Turkish can be taught in a single university term, as it supposedly offers little beyond Shahriar’s Heydar Babaya Salam and a few scattered poems.
Supporters of mother tongue education counter that the diverse dialects of Turkish, due to their vast geographical spread and large number of speakers, possess significant literary and textual richness. They cite works by Mahmud Kashgari (China's Turkestan), Orhan Pamuk (Nobel Laureate, Turkey), Nazim Hikmet (Turkey), Fuzuli, Nesimi, and Shahriar (Azerbaijan), and Chingiz Aitmatov (Kazakhstan) as examples of this richness. They argue that if Iranian Turks have been unable to develop their language and literature during contemporary times, the blame lies with the sociopolitical conditions under the Pahlavi dynasty and the Islamic Republic. Therefore, instead of questioning the inherent potential of the language, efforts should focus on addressing past injustices, not perpetuating them.
2. No one will embrace non-Persian languages.
Opponents of mother tongue education often assert that “if Turkish-language schools were established in Iran, no one would enroll in them,” suggesting that Turkish-speaking citizens would continue sending their children to Persian-language schools.
Proponents of mother tongue education argue that this assumption lacks scientific and experiential support, as Turkish-language schools have never been tested. Such claims are, therefore, akin to passing judgment before trial. Furthermore, they note that people's inclination to learn a language offering better job and social opportunities applies to Persian as well. For example, if residents of Tehran could choose between English-language and Persian-language schools, many might opt for English-language schools to secure better career prospects for their children.
However, an interest in English does not equate to a lack of interest in Persian or its abandonment. The mother tongue transcends its function as a mere communication tool; it forms a significant part of culture and identity, encapsulating a person's heritage and sense of self. For this reason, many countries mandate education in the mother tongue, arguing that potential lack of interest cannot justify depriving younger generations of learning their native languages.
3. Learn your mother tongue in private schools!
Another argument suggests that if Turks are keen to learn their mother tongue, they can do so at home or request permits to establish private schools for teaching it.
Advocates for mother tongue education respond that obtaining permits and establishing private schools is fraught with bureaucratic hurdles. Moreover, using state revenues from oil resources in Arab-majority regions to promote Persian language and literature, while asking Ahvaz’s Arabs to learn their mother tongue in private schools, is neither just nor logical.
4. The mother tongue is a code word for separatism.
Perhaps the most significant obstacle to non-Persian mother tongue education is the perception that learning native languages is linked to separatism and threatens national territorial integrity.
While it is difficult to definitively assess the validity of this claim, advocates argue that in an age of information explosion and enhanced connectivity, policies of “one country, one language,” suppression of unofficial languages, and ethnic and linguistic homogenization — relics of pre-World War II political thought — are no longer effective and may instead fuel separatist movements. Nonetheless, countries like Iran remain apprehensive about integrating multiple languages into their educational systems, considering it a precursor to separatism. They frequently claim that "conditions are not yet suitable" for teaching mother tongues, thereby avoiding the issue rather than addressing it.
5. We’re all victims of tyranny, so no to mother tongue education!
A common trope among opponents of non-Persian language education in Iran is the notion that all Iranians are victims of tyranny, and there are more pressing issues than mother tongue education. Hence, non-Persian speakers should refrain from protesting the prohibition of education in their native languages.
Supporters of mother tongue education acknowledge the shared suffering under Iran’s oppressive regime but argue that non-Persian speakers face additional adverse effects. While the official and dominant Persian language benefits from state support, paving the way for its growth, Turkish in Iran has often been relegated to an informal, conversational status.
In conclusion, for opponents of mother tongue education, maintaining the hegemony and exclusive status of Persian as the cornerstone of Iranian identity and territorial unity outweighs all else. As a result, they justify neglecting or indefinitely postponing the fundamental right to mother tongue education. However, advocates contend that just as fundamental rights like the right to life and sustenance cannot be conditional on regime change or political reform, neither should the right to mother tongue education be subject to any restrictions.
The link to the original article in Farsi on Iran Wire:
پنج استدلال مخالفان آموزش به زبان مادری در ایران