What is happening in Iran today is not just a regime crisis. This picture, in which the regional war is expanding and state levels are being shaken by the direct interventions of the US and Israel, actually reveals one of the most critical breaking points in Iran's modern history.
But in ancient states like Iran, crises are often more than collapses. periods when historical memory comes back into play it happens.
Therefore, in order to understand the current situation in Iran, we need to look not only at current political developments, The historical parenthesis opened in 1925 to look at.
Because the last century of the Iranian state was largely shaped within this bracket.
The 1925 Parenthesis: An Interruption in the Iranian State Tradition
When the modern political history of Iran is analyzed, 1925 is not only a dynastic change, but also an important turning point in the Iranian state tradition.
For nearly a thousand years, the political architecture of Iran's geography was largely The military power of the Turkish dynasties and the Persian bureaucratic tradition on which it was built.
The Seljuks, Ilkhanids, Karakoyunlu, Akkoyunlu, Safavids and Qajars represent different periods of this long historical continuity.
With the end of the Qajar dynasty in 1925, this historical balance was interrupted. The newly established state model largely defined Iranian identity. A Persian-centered nation-state ideology on the basis of the "new".
Therefore, when reading Iranian history, 1925 should not only be seen as a political transformation, It is possible to consider it as a “parenthesis” in which the historical state architecture was interrupted.
Today's crisis in Iran brings with it new debates on whether this parenthesis can be closed.
Turkish Architects of Shi'ism: From Kizilbash to Jafarism
The Shiification of Iran is not only a theological transformation; it is also a political process.
The Safavid movement rose on the military power of the Turkmen Qizilbash communities in Anatolia and Azerbaijan. The institutionalization of state Shiism in Iran was also the result of this political will.
For this reason, the structure of religious authority in Iran, especially in the office of “the authority of taqlid”, has historically A strong weight of ulema of Turkish origin is not surprising.
Shiism is not only a belief system; it has been one of the important carriers of social and political identity in Iran throughout history.
A Society United in Suffering: Culture of Mourning and the Quest for Justice
Shiism has historically been a narrative of oppression based on the memory of Karbala. The memory of Karbala is not only a religious event; it is also a symbol of the search for social justice.
Turkish communities have blended this belief with their own cultural worlds and transformed the tradition of mourning and mersiye into a strong element of identity.
The sad tone of the Bayati makam, combined with the call for justice of the mersiyya, has been used in the Iranian geography. a shared memory and a culture of solidarity has been created.
This is why social unity in Iran is often not a narrative of victory, solidarity created by shared suffering is born.
Traditional Shia objection to Velayat-e Faqih
Established in the 1979 revolution, the Velayat-e Faqih model represents a fundamental transformation in Shia political theory.
In the classical Shi'a understanding, the ulema do not directly assume political power but maintain a role of religious and moral guidance over society.
For this reason, many important religious authorities distanced themselves from this model after the revolution.
For example Mohammad Kazem Shariatmadari (Mohammad Kazem Shariatmadari) and Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei (Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei) important Shiite authorities, such as the Shi'ite Shiites, have openly objected to the Velayat-e Faqih model.
Today, one of the most prominent representatives of this Najaf-based traditional approach Ali Sistani (Ali al-Sistani)’s line. This line advocates that the ulema should remain in the role of social guidance rather than directly taking over state administration.
Historical Balance: Turk's Sword - Persian Pen
For many centuries, the Iranian state tradition has been based on a certain balance.
This balance is often described as follows:
Sword of the Turk - Pen of the Persian
This formula expresses the historical balance between the Turkish dynasties representing the military power and political authority of the Iranian state and the Persian administrative structure representing the bureaucratic and cultural state tradition.
The current vacuum of power and political crisis in Iran has led some observers to raise the prospect of a restoration of this historical balance.
This restoration replaced the theocratic model with a more a worldly and rational republican order to leave the country.
Home Front Arbitration: Common Homeland Defense
A remarkable reflex emerges in Iranian society during periods of intensified foreign intervention: a sense of inner unity is strengthened.
One of the important indicators of this reflex is the lack of broad social support for separatist movements in the face of external pressures, especially in the South Azerbaijan region.
This is often the case awareness of common homeland defense is explained with.
In Iran's history, as external threats have increased, a sense of unity among different ethnic and sectarian elements has emerged as a defensive reflex.
Conclusion A Restoration Possibility
Iran today is not only experiencing a political crisis. It is also on the verge of a historical rebalancing.
The tension between the historical state architecture interrupted in 1925 and the theocratic structure established by the 1979 revolution may lead to a search for a new political order.
This process is not about the division of Iran rebalancing by returning to its historical roots may result in.
Because understanding Iran is not possible only by following the power struggles in Tehran.
Understanding Iran;
It is to be able to read the state mind of Tehran, the cry of Tabriz in Bayati and the silent waiting of Najaf at the same time.
And perhaps the real question for Iran now is this:
As the parenthesis opened in 1925 closes, will the Iranian state return to the founding balance of its history, or will this ancient geography give birth to a new state mind?