The Unholy Alliance of Ideologies That Led To the Iranian Revolution

 

Suppose we want to appreciate the ideology that has shaped and driven the Islamic revolution since the beginning. It is necessary to understand the contact of ideology and the experiences behind the idea. The ideology itself works as a tool to provide narratives and a direction to achieve an idealistic version. The level of ambition in a vision determines the grandness of the narrative and better justification for the excesses committed or have to be committed.

A historical event with both spiritual and material ends can justify the means supporting pursuing those ends. It is essential to keep in mind that although the origins of the Iranian Revolution were Shia in nature, its ambitions were global. It drew on not only Islamic history but also the rich legacy of Iranian diversity. These concepts drew

Inspiration from Marxist.  For example, in 1977, a group of Iranian Marxists was arrested on accusation to kidnap Prince Reza Pahlavi.  Members of this group were Marxist.  One of the members named "Khosro Golesorkhi" in his last defense said

"I, who is Marxist, found Marx ideas in School of Islam when Imam Ali said that no palace would be built unless one hundred houses are destroyed. We find several similarities between two schools". Through this idea, he introduced a link between the two schools.

Although he was executed, his words became one of the foundations of the Iranian revolution. among a group of Shah's opponents.

Golesorkhi, in response to the prosecutor who said by land reform of Shah, the peasants now had their land, Golesorkhi responded

"Through this land reform, the peasants ran away to cities, and our agriculture was ruined." People believed him while this was an international trend that even happened in England.  Cities became industrialized, and peasants though there are more opportunities in cities than villages. Unfortunately, some people believed in Golesorkhi's words.  Also, after the fall of Russia, history proved to us that Marx's theory did not work.  Ayatollah Khomeini's vision separated the world into the oppressors and the oppressed that owed to Marxism as much as Islam. His description of the United States as the "Great Devil" gave greater material indulgence and anti-capitalist rhetoric in sacral terms.

Islamist Populism by Khomeini

Ali Shariati was a Western-educated intellectual who became a key figure in defining the ideology of revolution. Inspired by the Marxist-driven anti-colonialist scholars such as Franz Fanon, Shariati set his sights to converge Marxism with Islamism. This ideology aimed to bring forward-thinking that could oust the regime of Pahlavi and free Iran from the clutches of Western Imperialism. Khomeini capitalized on the ideas of Shariati after his death (happened before the revolution) and formulated Islamist populism.

The understanding of the ideology behind the Islamic Revolution must acknowledge the combination of ideas between the secular left-wing and the religious right-wing. Shah used to describe this as the "unholy alliance of the black and the red." This alliance is important to understand each ideology given by revolutionaries, the universal view, and its appeal beyond Iran's borders. For the ideologues of the West, it was another manifestation of yet another battle against the effects of colonialism and capitalism.

After the victory of Khomeini, newspapers published the best captured the celebration of Shah's collapse. They acknowledge the way Khomeini provided a much-needed model of human governance to third-world Iran. These ideas made the West deem Khomeini as the Gandhi of Iran.

Similar to all the ideologies, the Islamic Revolution can also claim itself to be for the oppressed of the world. Perhaps the more surprising that came for the observes of the West was the belief that the revolutionaries had in their minds. In their idea, their evolution was the third in the line of the greatest evolutions in the world, the Russian and French Revolution. The revolutionaries of Iran saw their historical value through European terms as a product of unfolded history. Other third world revolutions were not in their field of vision and remained largely irrelevant due to the grand narrative they sought to put forward.

Revolution Against Republic

There is another distinction that Western observers tend to miss is between the Islamic Revolution and the Islamic Republic. The revolution does not exist to perfect the state, whereas the state is there to support and perfect the revolution. The revolution has more priority whenever there is a conflict between the two. The distinction is itself ignored by the Iranian political elements as they aim to promote the republic institutions and Islamic democracy.

It should never be forgotten that the supreme leader is the leader of the revolution and not of the republic. The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) protects the revolution's purity and defends it from enemies inside and outside. The institution grew in power under the previous President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when his core ideology gained prominence. The Green Movement protest against the 2009 presidential elections was a rude awakening for many Iranians who thought the revolution was political emancipation. It happened with the abrupt announcement that the obedience of the supreme leader and his appointees was the same as that of the obedience to God. No monarch of this era can indeed make this claim.

Tunnel Vision of the West

Those who wanted to see the good in Iranian political life or perceive Iran as a post-modern revolutionary state by excellence largely ignored the extraordinary ideological positions. Indeed, the ability to position itself as a victim of Western ideas has allowed Iran to gain considerable political leverage that was seen in the Iranian nuclear program negotiations. 

The failure of former President Barack Obama's administration to properly read the intentions of Iran and view their political developments through relations with the West severely limited the West's negotiation position.

The desire for negotiations to pass took the thinking of Western policymakers in another direction. If we take the case of nuclear negotiations, the well-intended but misinformed European Union (EU) became the middleman, and the European External Action Service (EEAS) was formed under the heat of conversation. The EEAS established that they would safeguard the agreement at all costs, which induced a tunnel vision that ignored wider political problems.

Therefore, the nuclear agreement intended to bind Iranians instead of limited EU because of their determination not to jeopardize the agreement. The difference of position became quickly evident when Iranians quickly shored their Syrian allies in 2015. This notion ran contrary to the idea the US had, as they thought the agreement would open doors to new dialogues.

Simply put, while Khamenei, the present supreme leader, might have agreed that the arc of history has to be bent towards justice, we did not shred the destination.

The Real Reason behind Regime Change In Iran

The above event and facts led Iran toward the Islamic revolution. After 30 years and looking at unclassified documentation that became official, we learn something much more than those involved. 

In 1975 in the last OPEC meeting, Saddam Hossein, Vice President of Iraq, only spoke for 3 minutes and complained that the West wants to buy the oil at a cheap rate and sell the commodity back to us at an expensive price. Shah, in that meeting, was among the main speakers and said if the West wants to get more money on their products, we will increase the price of oil as well, and we continue doing that until they come to the table of negotiation.

At that time, Iran had the fifth-largest army globally, and Shah knew his army had his back since it was the fifth powerful army in the world. In the 5th OPEC meeting, such a suggestion upset the West because they could not use the military against Shah, and Shah was too smart to be deceived.

Britain, the old colonial Fox, recommended removing Shah by people's religion and Ayatollah's main figure. When Jimmy Carter started talking about human rights and political freedom in Iran and later fund that revolution. In Shah's view, political freedom was too early because he thought that the country is ready to reach that level when everyone is financially secured and educated. He predicted that Iran would have reached that point in 12 years from that point (1976).  Carter started putting pressure on Shah for more political freedom, so revolution occurred when all factors came together.

Even though at the beginning, the West may have wanted to see the change in regime in Iran, but now they call it a "Whale Suicide" to lose an ally like Shah.

 

By: Shahriar Jahanian, Ph.D