US military expert Ralph Peters has called for the redrawing of borders in the Middle East to take account of the region's ethnic groups (
click here for article
).
Writing for the Armed Forces Journal, Peters argues that current borders are "arbitrary and distorted" and "generate more trouble than can be consumed locally." He claims that "the greatest taboo in striving to understand the region's comprehensive failure isn't Islam but the awful-but-sacrosanct international boundaries worshipped by our own diplomats."
He proposes creating independent states for the Kurds, Balochis, Iraqi Sunnis and Arab Shias, including Ahwaz Arabs, and a breaking up of Saudi Arabia. Jordan and Yemen would expand into Saudi territory, while the borders of Lebanon, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Azerbaijan would be adjusted to cover their respective ethnic groups.
On the changes he proposes for Iran's boundaries, Peters, a former US military intelligence officer, writes: "Iran, a state with madcap boundaries, would lose a great deal of territory to Unified Azerbaijan, Free Kurdistan, the Arab Shia State and Free Baluchistan, but would gain the provinces around Herat in today's Afghanistan - a region with a historical and linguistic affinity for Persia. Iran would, in effect, become an ethnic Persian state again, with the most difficult question being whether or not it should keep the port of Bandar Abbas or surrender it to the Arab Shia State."
He warns that failure to address the aspirations of the region's minorities will lead to prolonged instability in the Middle East, allowing terrorism to thrive, adding "If the borders of the greater Middle East cannot be amended to reflect the natural ties of blood and faith, we may take it as an article of faith that a portion of the bloodshed in the region will continue to be our own."
Nasser Bani Assad, spokesman for the British Ahwazi Friendship Society (BAFS), said: "Ralph Peters understands the problems caused by the arbitrary carve-up of the Middle East by European colonial powers and the continuing impact that has on regional stability. But this is an academic exercise, not a practical solution to the demands of ethnic minority groups in the Middle East. He gives no indication as to how such a radical adjustment of national borders would be achieved. It is unlikely that Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran would willingly relinquish oil-rich territory and strategic access to the Gulf for an independent Arab Shia state, defined along confessional lines. The only way to achieve such a redrawing of territories is by force, creating more problems than the exercise would solve.
"Another issue is whether this proposal is what minorities actually want. Ahwazis have never argued for a unification with Arabs of the Saudi province of Al Hudud ash Shamaliyah, as Peters has proposed. Peters assumes that Arab Shias are homogenous and are defined by religion. But tribal identity plays an important role in the lives of rural Ahwazis, while urban Ahwazis are largely secular in their political outlook and cosmopolitan in their tastes. A Shia theocracy run by Ayatollah Sistani would be unpalatable for a people who define themselves by their culture rather than their religion. Ahwazis will not want to replace rule by an Iranian Shia theocracy with an Iraqi religious elite based in Najaf. Moreover, the Arab Shia state proposed by Peters would ensure that Ahwazis remain a minority in a state that is two-thirds Iraqi. His map is therefore just as arbitrary as the borders devised by the British, taking little account of the distinctiveness and ambitions of the Ahwazis or other minority groups.
"There are more practical political solutions to ethnic grievances than a redrawing of borders, no matter how unjust the present ones are. Some ethnic groups would simply be happy for the right to organise their own parties, run their own media, the right to be educated in their own language and the devolution of power. For the Ahwazis, ethnic concerns could be met through the redistribution of a significant portion of income generated by their homeland's resources and a reversal of the land confiscation programme that has forced them off their land.
"All these demands pose no threat to Iran's territorial integrity, but it is clear that they cannot be met under the present regime, which has ruthlessly persecuted minorities and banned any attempts at peaceful political mobilisation.
"The task for Ahwazis and other minority groups in Iran is to make minority rights a part of the struggle for democracy and human rights in Iran. This is what the Congress of Nationalities for a Federal Iran is trying to achieve. It is the responsibility of the international community to support such grass-roots initiatives, rather than imposing solutions based on academic exercises."
Links
Iran: regionalism, ethnicity and democracy - Nayereh Tohidi, Open Democracy
Interview with Mustafa Hijri, the Secretary-general of Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran - Kurdistanmedia.org
Safeguarding the Ahwazi Arabs: Essential for a Stable and Democratic Middle East - Daniel Brett, Henry Jackson Society
The manifesto of the Democratic Solidarity Party of Ahwaz (Arabistan)
Congress of Nationalities for a Federal Iran
Labels: minorities
permalink
keywords: ahvaz ahwaz ahwazi arabistan khuzestan khuzistan khuzestani arab arabistan iran iranian human rights security oil news ahmadinejad ethnic cleansing
.......................................................................................
