Fahimeh Khezr Haidari, Radio Farda - November 4, 2016
Can some groups of Iranians be described as Arabophobic? Is there discrimination, hostility, hatred, or prejudice toward Arab culture and people among certain groups in Iran?
In this week's Taboo program, Yousef Azizi Benitorof, Secretary of the Association for Combatting Racism and Arabophobia, debates the issue with former diplomat Reza Ghasemi.
Mr. Benitorof, you emphasize the existence of Arabophobia in Iran. Can you elaborate on this and explain how it manifests and at what levels?
Yousef Azizi Benitorof: In my view, the issue in Iran sometimes goes beyond Arabophobia and even involves calls for Arabicide. If you’ve heard the song “Arab-kosh” (Kill Arabs) by Behzad Pax, it explicitly incites the killing of Arabs.
 |
| Yousef Azizi Banitorof is a journalist based in London and the secretary of the Association for Combating Racism and Anti-Arabism. |
Does this mean that Arabophobia is prevalent across Iran?
Benitorof: Undoubtedly. Arabophobia is cultivated within the middle class of Iranian society, which includes intellectuals, politicians, artists, and the like, and it permeates the wider society. This discourse is not exclusive to the ruling class.
However, fortunately, due to efforts made, Arabophobia is gradually being recognized by some Iranian intellectuals, and reactions to it are emerging. Yet these reactions are still minimal, and the wave of Arabophobia and racism in Iran is quite overwhelming.
Mr. Ghasemi, you’ve heard Mr. Benitorof’s remarks. He claims a powerful wave of Arabophobia still exists in Iran. What is your perspective?
Reza Ghasemi: Allow me to clarify. In a family, among siblings, such conflicts exist without them being enemies. If we interpret it as war, hostility, and enmity, I don’t recognize such a phenomenon in Iran. We have coexisted with Arab peoples and Arabic speakers over centuries. The bond that connects us with Arabs is the religion of Islam.
We have grievances against our Arab co-religionists, but Arabophobia, in the sense of clawing at each other, is something I don’t think exists.
 |
| Reza Ghassemi is a political analyst and a former Iranian diplomat who served as Iran's ambassador to Kuwait during the final years of the Pahlavi government. |
Mr. Benitorof, you heard Mr. Ghasemi’s comments. Can you provide concrete examples to support your claim of a significant wave of Arabophobia in Iran?
Benitorof: One of Iran’s most prominent novelists and a pioneer of modernism, Sadegh Hedayat, writes about Arabs—some of whom are his fellow countrymen—in Toop-e Morvarid (The Pearl Cannon), page 16:
"To be honest, these smelly, ugly, lizard-eating Arabs have gone too far."
Elsewhere, he says:
"Everything about them—Arabs—is mixed with filth, baseness, greed, tastelessness, death, and misery. Why are their faces mournful and cunning, their poetry lamentation, and their singing whining?"
Similarly, Bozorg Alavi, another prominent Iranian novelist, writes in his book Div, Div (Devil, Devil), page 14:
"You all know who the culprit is. He is not one of us. He is of Arab descent. He is a devil. You can see it in his black face and scruffy beard. We do not lie. We are not devils. The devil is Arab, who has brought us to this state. He must be killed."
Mr. Benitorof, you provide examples from Iranian literature and works by intellectuals. But how does this translate to the daily lives of people in Khuzestan? Outside of literature, where else can it be observed?
Benitorof: In the Persian-language newspapers of the capital, particularly sports newspapers, Arabs are insulted under the general term Arab—not as Emiratis, Qataris, or Saudis. This happens especially during football matches against Arab countries. In Tehran's stadiums, with tens of thousands of spectators, you can hear all kinds of derogatory chants directed at Arabs.
Mr. Ghasemi, what’s your take on Mr. Benitorof’s statements?
Ghasemi: Regarding what Mr. Benitorof mentioned about Sadegh Hedayat: Hedayat was a very nationalist and extremist individual, and excessive extremism is never good. He even learned the Pahlavi language and wrote in it. Arabophobia is indeed evident in his works.
However, we have hundreds of works where Arabs are not insulted or demeaned. The examples mentioned—like a particular song or some foolish slogans—are from individuals lacking education or culture and cannot be taken seriously. If the entire educated spectrum in Iran were Arabophobic, I would kiss the ground and step aside.
But Mr. Ghasemi, this raises a question. When Sadegh Hedayat and the intellectual community are mentioned, you describe them as nationalistic extremists. When referring to stadium crowds, you say they are uneducated and ignorant.
Ghasemi: Yes, in any country, all kinds of people exist. That’s not an issue. Don’t you see similar conflicts in European or American societies? Look at the U.S. elections—the things one candidate says about the other!
In a society where people are free—even though no one has the right to insult—individuals are free to express their opinions and views. We, too, have opinions about Arabs—about what they’ve done to us and how they think and behave.
What are the historical roots of the conflicts you describe as Arabophobia or others term so?
Ghasemi: The historical roots of our disagreements with Arabs go back to the Arab conquest of Iran during the time of the second caliph and the practice of calling Iranians Mawali. For example, the supposed burning of libraries under the second caliph wounded many hearts.
We had a pure religion based on good thoughts, good words, and good deeds. It wasn’t idol worship that Arabs needed to guide us to monotheism. Iranians’ resentment stems from such issues, but it’s not Arabophobia per se.
Benitorof: Both Islamophobia and Arabophobia exist in Iran. However, Islamophobes, fearing the government’s might, often direct their sentiments more toward Arabs than Islam itself. That’s one point. Second, Mr. Ghasemi mentioned freedom in Western societies. But in Western societies, racism is prohibited—it’s a crime in Germany and England. In Iran, however, freedom is one-sided and reserved only for Arabophobes.
As for the narrative about Umar burning books—it’s a major historical fabrication. Iranian historians have noted that during the Sassanid era, there was no such advanced philosophy or library system that could be destroyed. The animosity between Persians—the Persian Empire—and their eastern neighbors predates Islam.
Even so, after Islam, when Arabs called Persians Mawali, it was a reaction to pre-Islamic hostilities against Arabs. From a historical and contemporary perspective, both are unacceptable phenomena. In post-Islamic times, the Shu'ubiyya movement spearheaded Arabophobia, with Ferdowsi being one of its prominent figures.
Everyone has heard Ferdowsi’s poem:
"From eating camel milk and lizard flesh,
The Arabs have reached such a state...
That they aspire to wear the crown of kingship.
Cursed be you, O revolving heavens!"
Ghasemi: That’s a quote, sir—a quote.
Interviewer: Mr. Benitorof, the authenticity of this poem has been questioned, and you are aware of this.
Benitorof: All of this belongs to Ferdowsi, ma’am!
May I continue with another question that arose based on your discussion? If we consider all these imperial wars, as Mr. Benitorof put it, why don’t we feel a similar historical grudge toward other nations that attacked Iran? Why is the hostility focused on Arabs?
Qasemi: For example, with the Greeks, since both nations had rich cultures and histories, there were conflicts and mutual influences, but it wasn’t as intense because it didn’t last. Did Alexander’s invasion of Iran last? It was brief, ended, and he moved on. Or with the Tatars and other groups. But the issue with Islam is something we’ve been grappling with for 1,400 years. The matter of Arab-phobia or Islamophobia, as you put it, remains relevant because it continues. This is because our Arab friends and co-religionists haven’t treated us well. It’s important not to view this one-sidedly. For instance, consider the Arab League, established 70 years ago. They have never reached consensus on anything except for two issues: one is the fabricated name for the Persian Gulf, and the other is the matter of the three islands.
Actually, Mr. Qasemi, one of the questions we need to ask in this discussion is how much of this hostility stems from disputes over the name of the Persian Gulf versus the Arabian Gulf, or other terms used by some Arab countries. How significant do you think this has been in shaping the conflict?
Qasemi: Very significant. Think about it—how could they just sit down and change a historical name, one recorded in history’s annals?
Mr. Benitorof, let’s assume we accept this notion of anti-Iran sentiment from neighboring Arab Gulf states or other Arab countries. Do you believe that Arabs living in Iran should be held accountable for this sentiment?
Benitorof: That’s precisely the question to ask him. It’s a sharp question. What crime have the millions of Arabs in southwestern and southern Iran committed, such that whenever there’s a dispute between Iranian regimes—be it the monarchy or the Islamic Republic—and neighboring countries over the Gulf issue, it’s the Iranian Arabs who are subjected to curses, insults, and humiliation?
I understand. Allow me to ask my question to you, Mr. Benitorof. How much do you think Iranian Arabs themselves exacerbate these issues and disputes? For example, we’re discussing sensitivities over the name Persian Gulf. Are you unwilling to use the name Persian Gulf?
Benitorof: In Ahvaz prisons, interrogators ask Arab prisoners, “Do you say Arabian Gulf or Persian Gulf?” even when the prisoner’s crime is unrelated. Across Ahvaz and most cities in the province, this question is asked of every Arab prisoner. In Iran, the Gulf's name has become a matter of honor rather than research. Who said its name has always been Persian Gulf? At various points in history, it was called the Gulf of Sumer, the Arabian Gulf, and the Persian Gulf. Today, Turkey calls it the Gulf of Basra, and Azerbaijan calls it the Gulf of Iran. This is a fallacy, but you cannot have these discussions in Iran. If someone expresses doubt about the Gulf's name being Persian, they are silenced brutally.
Qasemi: This name is historic, and UNESCO has issued resolutions stating that historic names must not be changed under any circumstances. Changing a historical name is a grave mistake, one that’s unforgivable.
Benitorof: They’ve Persianized the names of over 200 villages and neighborhoods in our province. These had historic Arab names.
Qasemi: Our hearts ache from the conduct of our Arab friends...
Allow me to interject, Mr. Qasemi. Since everyone is speaking simultaneously, listeners might not catch this. Mr. Benitorof raised an important point about name changes during the Pahlavi era in Khuzestan and its cities, such as Khorramshahr. Those were also historic names, Mr. Qasemi.
Qasemi: No, not at all. Let me clarify. It wasn’t just Khuzestan. Babol was once Barforoush and became Babol. Ramsar was Sakhtsar and became Ramsar. Babolsar was Mashhadsar and became Babolsar. Khorramshahr was Muhammarah and became Khorramshahr. I don’t understand—why should there be an Arabistan in Iran?
This brings me to a question for Mr. Benitorof. There’s a serious debate here: do we have Iranian Arabs in Iran or Arabic-speakers of Iran? What is your response, as this is a key distinction?
This brings me to a question for Mr. Benitorof. There’s a serious debate here: do we have Iranian Arabs in Iran or Arabic-speakers of Iran? What is your response, as this is a key distinction?
Benitorof: Look, Reza Shah had chauvinistic motives. He didn’t change Azerbaijan's name, which represents the Turks of Azerbaijan, nor Kurdistan, which reflects the Kurdish people, nor Lorestan or Bakhtiari.
Qasemi: That’s because they are of Aryan descent and consider themselves Iranian.
Benitorof: So, you’re drawing a racial line between Arab Iranians and Aryan Iranians? That’s the same racial boundary. Reza Shah only changed the name of Arabistan, one of Iran's protectorates. He also altered the names of over 200 cities, villages, and geographical sites. It seems there’s a double standard regarding historical names. Persian Gulf is good, but Arabistan is bad, Muhammarah is bad.
Mr. Qasemi, you suggested that the Aryan regions are part of the Iranian identity. Could you elaborate on this?
Qasemi: I don’t believe our Arab-speaking friends in the south and Khuzestan are Arabs. I always say Arab-speaking because they live within Iran. They hold Iranian passports and ID cards. If they don’t accept this, then the question arises—if you don’t accept it, why are you in Iran? Either they accept being Iranian or they don’t. If they accept it, they are our compatriots and deserve all rights and respect.
Mr. Benitorof, what’s your response to these remarks?
Benitorof: The Arab people or Arab nation in southern and southwestern Iran are not Arab-speaking. They were never Lurs or Persians who became Arabized. They have been Arabs throughout history, from pre-Islamic times to the present. Both their language and culture are Arabic. They are a nation among the nations of Iran, referred to in the Constitutional Revolution as the “protectorates.” At times, Arabistan was even independent.
They make up 6-8% of Iran's population. If the people of Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraqi Kurdistan, or the Republic of Azerbaijan are nations, so are the Arab people of southern and southwestern Iran. Iran is a multi-national country. Mr. Qasemi lives in England, where Scotland held an independence referendum without a single bullet being fired or any insults to Scots. The people of Muhammarah should be asked if they prefer the name Muhammarah or the imposed Khorramshahr, a name that has no place in Iran or Arab history. It was forced upon them by Reza Shah, the oppressive fascist.
Qasemi: Mr. Benitorof called Reza Shah oppressive and fascist. I ask him to retract those remarks. Reza Shah was a nation-builder. His greatest service was to capture Sheikh Khazal, forcing him to surrender, and preventing Khuzestan's separation from Iran. I wish we didn’t have oil there so there wouldn’t be so much greed over it.
This takes us back to a broader question, Mr. Qasemi. Does Persian-Iranian nationalism involve erasing the identities of others, whether they are Arabs, Turks, or others? To achieve a united Iran, do we need to eliminate other ethnic identities?
Qasemi: We must respect all identities, without a doubt. But when someone says they are proud not to be Iranian, what should we do? If every region claimed independence, the nation would disintegrate...
Let me reframe the question. Arab Iranians, or Arabic-speaking groups, how can they feel part of the Iranian national identity and embrace it? How can they not say they are proud not to be Iranian? What steps would you propose to foster this sense of belonging?
Qasemi: One solution is to respect their national culture. For example, Azerbaijani children should be able to study in Turkish, Kurdish children in Kurdish, and Arabs in Arabic. Assigning governors from different regions is a mistake. Local officials should share the same language and identity to better understand local issues.
The centralization of resources in Tehran and major cities has caused neglect of ethnic groups. The allure of Khuzestan’s oil has blinded people. Instead of turning the region into another Qatar or Abu Dhabi, a fair distribution of resources could solve many problems.
This neglect towards ethnic groups in Iran – and I must say, I don’t even like the term “minorities” – has affected various ethnic communities in the country, as everything is concentrated in the center, in Tehran and major cities. The smell of Khuzestan’s oil has so filled the nostrils of the authorities that they seem intent on turning the region into something like Qatar, Bahrain, or Abu Dhabi. Thus, the government’s role is very important, but unfortunately, some argue that what we have originates from the Arabs, while a bit of historical study would reveal that much of what Arabs have as part of their culture actually comes from Iran.
Nations, after all, borrow from one another and influence each other culturally. Perhaps even this discussion about whether they borrowed from us or we borrowed from them only exacerbates this dichotomy and fails to help resolve the issue.
Qasemi: Ibn Khaldun mentions this in Muqaddimah.
My point is something else. The very idea of debating whether they borrowed from us or we borrowed from them might intensify this binary thinking and might not help in addressing the issue. Mr. Benitorof, let me ask you, as an activist for the rights of Arabs in Iran…
Qasemi: Iranian Arabic speakers.
You believe, particularly regarding the elites and intellectuals, what should be done?
Benitorof: See, even calling them “Arabic speakers” is an insult, an act of racism and Arabophobia. These people identify as Iranian Arabs, not merely Arabic speakers. This terminology has repeatedly angered the Arab people. Secondly, regarding the earlier point, when it was said that Arab culture derives from Iran, that too reflects a kind of racism and Persian supremacism.
Qasemi: We didn’t say this; Ibn Khaldun said it.
Benitorof: Now, to answer your question, Ms. Heidari. This inequality among the nationalities in Iran poses a threat to the country’s unity. Therefore, critiquing Persian-centric supremacist discourse, racism, and Arabophobia, and establishing a democratic and federal system in Iran, could shield the country from future dangers. However, even now, anti-racism and anti-Arabophobia laws could be passed in Iran’s parliament to ensure that no one can insult the identity of any of the nationalities in Iranian society.
Heidari: Mr. Reza Qasemi and Mr. Yousef Azizi Benitorof, thank you very much for participating in today’s discussion. Our conversation got quite intense today, of course…
Benitorof: Naturally, but Mr. Qasemi and I are friends outside this debate.
Qasemi: I’m very glad we had another chance to talk today, Mr. Benitorof.
The link to the original article in Farsi on Radio Farda:
عربستیزی ایرانی یا اعراب ایرانستیز؟