Natalie Cassedy
March 21, 2013
An article from Time Magazine
published in 2009 accurately describes the ethnic makeup in Iran, and the
conflicts that occurred during the last election year. In late 2009, only a few
months after the presidential elections, there was a suicide bomber who killed
42 people in the Southern province of Sistan-Baluchistan. The Iranian government
attempted to blame outside forces, such as the U.S. or Pakistan, but an ethnic
group called the Baluch took responsibility for the attack. The goal of the
attack was to kill officers of the Revolutionary Guard Corps. The attack was
successful in killing five members, and there were also thirty-seven civilian
casualties.
Iran is a country that has a
majority Persian population. Fifty-one percent of its population is Persian therefore;
they are able to hold the majority of political seats. However, there are many
ethnic groups that represent a significant portion of Iran’s population, and
the Baluch are one such group. They represent nine percent of the population.
These ethnic groups at times have felt oppressed by the government. They feel
as if they are not properly represented in the government, and this is where
the conflict arose.
It is important to look at these
types of ethnic conflicts in Iran, because at times ethnic conflicts can lead
to political violence. Erik Cederman argues that ethnicity can be a cause of
civil war. When groups feel under represented they will either fight for better
representation in their states government, or if they have enough resources
they will fight to be separate from the state altogether. However, if there are
many ethnic groups fighting then many civil wars could potentially break out,
which would increase instability in the region.
It is important for the Iranian
government to remember this conflict, especially since they have elections this
upcoming summer. If the various ethnic groups within the state feel as though
the results of the elections do not portray their interests, more conflicts
such as the suicide bombing are likely to occur. The international community should
keep informed on the state of Iran because they are looking to become a nuclear
power. If there is internal instability in the region then security on the
nuclear materials could be lacking and there is a higher probability of them
being stolen. It is dangerous for a any nuclear state to have political unrest.
Source:
Robert Baer. Time Magazine. October 21,2009
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1931402,00.html
You make a good point about these ethnic tensions creating instability within the country. You mention the Nuclear capabilities of Iran and it got me thinking about the possibility that this potential resource will have on the ethnic tensions. Is there one group that is in control of government projects like nuclear power? You said that the Persians hold the majority of seats in the government, but do they exclude other groups from sections of the government? If they hold a monopoly of some sort in government agencies dealing with nuclear power then could this increase tensions?
ReplyDeleteThe nuclear power of Iran doesn't really seem to be an issue that has raised domestic ethnic tensions. According to the IAEA, little information is actually know about nuclear power development. Ahmadinejad holds the majority of the power and he is in fact Persian. He claims that there is complete transparency with his nuclear program, but th IAEA's research has suggested there is witheld subject, so I don't think the general public knows much about Iran's nuclear program, and thus would probably not really result in any increase in ethnic tensions due to questions of who controls nuclear power.
ReplyDeleteAlthough nuclear power may not be raising ethnic tensions as of now, I think that with external pressure and oversight rising in the future that it may be a possible pathway which in the long run can give way to even more ethnic tensions. When there is ethnic tension, it seems that groups tend to focus on major resources as a mechanism to perpetuate tensions. With this said, Iran has one of the top oil reserves, which ethnic groups tend to scrutinize as a possible cause to their voices not being heard within the government.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is also important to consider Iranian ethnic tensions in the context of the greater Middle East. As we saw throughout the uprisings in Bahrain, sectarian identity was an important part of the Bahraini monarchy's narrative of the protests. In my opinion, many scholars, journalists, and analysts quickly point to sectarian identities as the most important defining characteristic of peoples in the Middle East, overlooking things like ethnicity (for example, overlooking Persian vs Arab tensions by focusing too much on Shia vs Sunni tensions). I think this is a tremendous over-simplification.
ReplyDeleteLooking at developing ethnic tensions in countries like Iraq will be important for the future of the Middle East because of its regional power status. Stability in counties like Iran and Saudi Arabia are extremely important to the overall stability of the region and significant tensions between ethnic groups within such countries could lead to many other implications. Oil revenue power still maintains balance within Iran but as reserves grow smaller and time passes events like these between ethnic groups will become very important for MENA stability in the future.
ReplyDeleteEthnicity plays a huge role in state stability. "Large ethnic groups that are excluded from state power or underrepresented in government are much more likely to challenge the regime’s insiders through violent means"(cederman). in multi-ethnic societies it is much harder to coordinate actions, and leaders play off of the fear that exists between groups. Iran must figure out a way to promote a cohesive and unified national population in order to avoid potential uprising and violence.
ReplyDelete