- Prof. Pirouz Mojtahedzadeh is a prominent Iranologist,
geopolitics researcher, historian and political scientist. He teaches geopolitics
at the Tarbiat Modares University of Tehran. He has been the advisor of
the United Nations University and the founder and manager of the London-based
Urosevic foundation. Mojtahedzadeh has published more than 20 books in
Persian, English and Arabic on the geopolitics of Persian Gulf region and
modern discourses in international relations. Since 2004, he has been a
member of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature.
-
- Moreover, he has been a member of the British Institute
of Iranian Studies since 1993. Prof. Mojtahedzadeh earned a Ph.D. in Political
Geography from the University of London in 1993 and also obtained a Ph.D.
in Political Geography from the University of Oxford in 1979.
-
- He has been a member of the board of the Society for
contemporary Iranian Studies at the University of London and also a senior
research associate at the Geopolitics & International Boundaries Research
Centre.
-
- Prof. Mojtahedzadeh has published scores of articles
regarding the historicity and veracity of Persian Gulf name and the legality
of Iran's ownership over the three Persian Gulf islands of Lesser Tunb,
Greater Tunb and Abu Musa. He has delivered several international speeches
in which he has scientifically repudiated the territorial claims of the
United Arab Emirates government over the three Iranian islands and also
confronted the psychological operation of the U.S.-backed Arab monarchies
in the Middle East in distorting the historical name of the Persian Gulf.
-
- What follows is the complete text of my exclusive interview
with Prof. Mojtahedzadeh in which we discussed the scientific, historical
authenticity of Persian Gulf's name, the legality of Iran's ownership of
the three Persian Gulf islands of Lesser Tunb, Greater Tunb and Abu Musa
and the futility of UAE and Bahrain's claims over these islands.
-
- Kourosh Ziabari: United Arab Emirates is at the forefront
of cultural battle with Iran. It's among the few nations in the world which
use the forged term of "Arabian Gulf" to refer to Persian Gulf.
It also cites territorial claims over the three Iranian Islands of Abu
Musa, Greater Tunb and Lesser Tunb frequently. Some scholars believe that
the people and youth in the UAE suffer from an identity crisis and that's
why the rulers of this tiny country have decided to bring back honor and
dignity to their people by staging a cultural propaganda against Iran and
stealing the cultural heritage of Iran. Some others believe that UAE is
being backed by the United States in its battle with Iran. What's your
viewpoint in this regard?
-
- Pirouz Mojtahed-Zadeh: The United Arab Emirates has in
deed been at the forefront of a cultural battle with Iran, which basically
stems from their problem of lack of a genuine national identity and has
been brought to the open in connection with their claims of sovereignty
on three islands of Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb, and Abu Musa, regardless
of the fact that these islands formed parts of Iranian dominion in the
Persian Gulf undisputedly up until the beginning of 19th century, when
British colonial presence began to grow in the southern shores of the Persian
Gulf, whereupon the first germs of the creation of the emirates of those
shores were sawn in what was Iranian dependant tribal entities. Soon these
emirates, as a result of the 19th century British strategy of de-Persianization
of the Persian Gulf, emerge as Arab entities of British protection. British
support for their territorial expansion encouraged their territorial claims
in a political space that was Iranian to a large extent at the time, and
- further encouraged them in post-1971 independence to
try and assume an identity which was not in any way associated with Iran
or being Persian. Hence, they make more efforts than all others, to change
the name of the Persian Gulf as well as laying claim to the said three
islands. There are scores of documents proving that the entire region of
the Persian Gulf belonged to Iran since time immemorial.
- Nevertheless, the British occupied these three islands
in 1903 in the name of British protectorate Qawasim tribes of Sharjah,
then covering the entire dominion of what is now known as UAE.
-
- Before withdrawing its protection of Arab emirates in
1971, the British called for the formation of a federation of its protectorate
emirates of the region, namely Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, Ras al-Khaimah,
Ajman, Fujairah and Umm-al-qowin, as well as Bahrain and Qatar, the latter
two refusing to join the proposed federation for their own reasons. It
was as a result of these said British plans that the United Arab Emirates
was formed out of the seven emirates of Musandam Peninsula on December
2, 1971, and the new entity began to call on behalf of two of its member
emirates,
-
- Sharjah and Ras-al-Khaimah for the three islands in question
to be added to its territories. Since territorial claims against other
states is an old, and highly effective tactic for a newly formed state
to enhance its particular design of nationhood and to assume a definitive
national identity, it seems the UAE has opted for territorial disputes
with Iran, the only non-Arab state of the Persian Gulf in the hope of attaining
its desired national unity and Arab identity. Territorial claims for nation-building
purposes has precedence in the region, as Iran claimed Bahrain in 1930s
in order to use the old Arab-Iranian conflicts to assist the process of
nation-building that Reza Shah had started then. Similarly the Baath regime
of Iraq claimed in 1950s and 1960s sovereignty over Khuzestan of Iran,
calling it "Arabistan" precisely because it re-awakened historical
Arab-Iranian controversy in the hope that it would enhance a pure Arabic
identity for Iraq of the semi-Iranian region of Mesopotamia.
-
- KZ: Which documents and evidences attest to the fact
that Persian Gulf is a legitimate, historical and acceptable name for the
body of water which separates Iran from the Arabian Peninsula? Why are
those who claim that the name of Persian Gulf should be changed wrong?
-
- PM: All documents of history and geography of mankind
bear evidence that the sea separating Iranian Plateau from Arabian Peninsula
as the Persian Gulf. Of the maritime geography of the world the works of
ancient Greeks and ancient Iranians seem to have been the earliest studies.
In their varying approaches they saw the surface of the world in the form
of a rectangular land mass surrounded by a world ocean from which the Greeks
thought four seas: the Mediterranean, Mare Caspian, Sinus Persicus, Sinus
Arabicus, brunched inward whereas the Iranians who have been the most ancient
people to inhabit areas in and around the Persian Gulf spoke of two seas
coming forth from the peripheral ocean; one named Parsa Draya, or the Persian
Sea to the eastern half of the world, but the other unnamed in ancient
literatures available to us, comprised all waters of western hemisphere
connected to the Mediterranean.
-
- It seems that the Romans, learning much from ancient
Iranians through their Macedonian conquerors, adopted the Persian Parsa
Darya in the form of Roman Mare Persicum or Persicum Aquarium. Yet, the
original Greek version Sinus Persicus seems to have survived in Western
civilizations to this day in the form of the term Persian Gulf.
-
- During the more recent centuries, Arab and Muslim geographers
adopted ancient Iranian geographical view of the world and Persian terminologies
in their geographical study of the world. They simultaneously used both
Greek Sinus Persicus = Persian Gulf and Persian Parsa Draya = Persian Sea
in their references to the body of water now known in modern global geography
as 'Persian Gulf'. There are hundreds of ancient and historical Islamic
and Arabic maps and other documents that prove this theory, which, at the
same time, clarify the authenticity of the geographical use, by Arabs and
other Muslims, of either of these two terms for the eastern waters of the
world.
-
- The first person to use a different name (in 1935) was
Sir Charles Belgrav, British Political Resident in the Persian Gulf, who
wanted to emphasize the partial success of British colonial strategy of
de-Persianization of the Persian Gulf. Though only a geopolitical move
his suggestion the much desired precedence for Pan-Arabist policies of
Iraqi Baath party in the 1950s and 1960s to follow is lead but for racist
reasons.
-
- This was because what constitutes Iraq now had been a
part of the Iranian federal system known in the West as Persian Empire
for centuries both before and after Islam. To the Baath party thinkers,
Cyrus the Great's conquer of Babylonia in the mid six century BC was not
to be forgiven because, no matter how emphatically the holy books in Islam,
Christianity and Judaism condemned Babylonian tyranny and its inhumanity,
to them Babylonia was an Arab state that represented Iraq's glorious past
upon which Iraq's new Pan-Arab identity had to be constructed.
-
- It was on the basis of this peculiar way of reading history
that a mind-boggling anti-Iranian (anti-Persian) campaign began which lasted
for 35 years, a major aspect of which was changing historical names of
geographical places. They endeavored to change the name of the Persian
Gulf into Arabian Gulf as well as trying to change the name of Khuzestan
province of southwest Iran into Arabistan in order to shed the Persian
aspect of their desired Pan-Arab identity. This is precisely the reason
for the United Arab Emirates to copy the Baathist style anti-Iranian (non-Arab
identity in the Persian Gulf) strategy in the hope of forging a pan-Arab
identity.
-
- But the answer to your question "Why are those who
claim that the name of Persian Gulf should be changed wrong" not only
is in the fact that the world has, through the United Nations and its relevant
commissions have affirmed validity of historical names of geographical
places including the name Persian Gulf in no uncertain terms, but because
of the scientific fact that geographical names have not been invented because
of political, racial, or religious motives to be changed for these reasons.
What kind civilized world would be, I ask all civilized people, if we were
to bow specially to the racially inclined policies of Saddam Hussein and
his followers in Qatar and Abu Dhabi in trying to change historical name
of an important geographical place like the Persian Gulf.
-
- KZ: Since its creation, United Arab Emirates started
a psychological campaign against Iran and claimed sovereignty over the
triple islands of the Persian Gulf. Are there reliable evidences available
to demonstrate that these islands have been eternally Iranian and cannot
be disputed by any other country?
-
- PM: Of course there are masses of documented evidence
proving the fact that the two islands of Tunb and Abu Musa Island have,
since time immemorial, belonged to Iran. To introduce your readers to these
documents I would recommend reference to many of my books and Articles
in English, Persian, and Arabic, particularly to the following books: The
Islands of Tunb and Abu Musa, published by SOAS of London University 1995
with Persian translation published by Sahab Cartography institute of Tehran
and Arabic translation published in Beirut by Dar-al-Montazir; Security
and Territoriality in the Persian Gulf, Curzon press, London 1999 and New
York 2002, with Persian translation which is published by IPIS of the Foreign
Ministry of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
- In my years of studying the history of legal status of
these islands I come across thousands of documents including original historical
documents in Persian, English and Arabic, as well as original government
documents from Iranian, British and local Arab governments, and diplomatic
correspondence. In addition to that it is quite interesting that I have
discovered nearly 30 official and semi-official maps of British authorities
both in London and India that verify Iran's undisputed ownership of these
islands throughout the period 1903 t0 1971 when they were occupied by the
British in the name of the Arab emirates of the time. I have introduced
all these maps in my aforementioned books.
-
- KZ: Please tell us a little bit about the historicity
of Bahrain's state as an Iranian province. Many of the countries in the
Persian Gulf and Central Asian region had been once provinces of Iran.
One of these countries which usually directs spates of psychological and
political propaganda against Iran is Bahrain. Is it possible for Iran to
claim sovereignty over Bahrain 30 years after its being separated from
the country?
-
- PM: To begin with I must stress that Bahrain is not an
enemy of Iran and does not direct spates of psychological and political
propaganda against Iran, unless when there are unfriendly gestures from
individuals in Tehran from time to time. In normal circumstances Bahrain
and Oman are two friendliest countries to Iran among the Arabs of the Persian
Gulf.
-
- The old Bahrain, which comprised Bahrain archipelago
as well as Qatar Peninsula and Hassa and Qatif provinces of modern Saudi
Arabia, was included in what was Persian Federative state that the Achaemenid
Empire had created in about 550 BC at the same time when Mesopotamia too
was included in that Persian federation. Yet, it is notable that it was
said to have been the cradle of Dilmun civilization two millennia prior
to the advent of the Achaemenids. Bahrain remained as a Persian Satrapy
until the advent of Islam when it began to play the role of an important
centre of anti-Caliphate movements. From the Safavid era in 16th century,
Bahrain returned to new Iranian federative state and remained so until
1860s when British colonial officers in the Persian Gulf decided to include
it in their colonial collection in southern shores of the Persian Gulf.
In fact when 1861 Colonel Lewis Pelly captured the archipelago and forced
Sheik Mohammad Al-Khalifah to sign his treaty of colonial protection, he
wrote to Nasser al-Din Shah Qajar pleading that as he and his dominion
in Bahrain were subjects of the Iranian state, he should be assisted in
his resistance vis-à-vis British colonial proposals. But that Shah
was too arrogant and too ignorant to understand the importance of the moment
and ignored, perhaps for the fear of the British, what was happening to
Bahrain. By imposing two treaties in 1861 to Sheikh Mohammad and 1868 to
his brother Sheikh Ali, the British separated Bahrain from Iran.
-
- It was in 1930s that during his endeavor for state building
and nation building Reza Shah Pahlavi resorted to territorial claims on
Bahrain (archipelago only), which in deed was instrumental in enhancing
his desired sense of nationhood in the modern nation state )Õ?ËÂ ÝÂ ÝÛ&laqno;ÍÁ(
of Iran that he had inaugurated. So, as you see Bahrain was not separated
from Iran 30 years ago, it was separated from Iran by the British in 18611868
during the reign of Nasser ad-Din Shah Qajar in the same period that other
parts of the old state in Central Asia, Caucasus, Mesopotamia, and south-east
Asia were ceded and. It is important to remember that it was during the
reign of Fathali Shah and Nasser al-Din Shah Qajar that all-together 14
countries, including modern Iran, came out of the belly of old Iranian
federation. What happened in 1970 was that as Iranian claims to Bahrain
had become a thorn on the side of the Iranian geopolitical designs in the
Persian Gulf for the period after the departure of British colonial rule
in the region, causing Iranian position in the changed political geography
of the region more harm in the region and beyond then any good at all,
the last Shah of Iran decided that to withdraw the old and exhausted claim
in an orderly and face-saving manner through the good offices of the Secretary
general of the United Nations. It is patently obvious that when measured
against this historical and geopolitical background, any idea of return
to the old claims will cause Iran even more harm in today's world of politics
than ever before.
-
- KZ: How is it possible to preserve the heritage of Persian
Gulf and derail the plots of enemies who want to bother us by trying to
change the name of this strategic body of water?
-
- PM: First of all let me make it absolutely clear that
when we talk amongst ourselves we may see the issue related to the attempts
in some Arab quarters in changing the name of the Persian Gulf as a plot
to bother our heritage, but as these attempts are made on international
level, the situation should not be seen as related to our internal problem
that harms our heritage, the defense of which would attract no international
sympathy. I have been advising this to the young Iranians abroad, specially
in the United States, who go around this matter in a way that gives ammunition
to our national enemies in the West and in Arab world using it as a tool
to further their accusations that we, Iranians have a colonial view of
the Persian Gulf because we see it as the sole heritage of Iran whereas
it owned by all nations of the region. The issue should be seen by us in
its international capacity as an affront that harms the world heritage
of preserved historical names of geographical places; an affront that has
been rejected by both international academic community and by the United
Nations. This kind of international campaign that I myself have been involved
(publishing several books and hundreds of articles in various languages
as well as delivering speeches at international gatherings and writing
letters of protest to political leaders and international media in the
West who happens from time to time, to compromise for a handful of petro-dollars
from certain Arab circles, their integrity), has proved during the past
four decades to be the most productive and most successful; the best way
that we can preserve the international heritage of the correct name of
the Persian Gulf.
-
- KZ: Is it possible for Iran to lodge a complaint against
the United Arab Emirates in an international court and sue its statesmen
for their frequent territorial claims against the Iranian islands of Abu
Musa, Greater Tunb and Lesser Tunb? In what legal framework can Iran tackle
this problem and subvert the plots of UAE which wants to take over the
three Iranian islands and undermine the territorial integrity of Iran?
-
- PM: No, it is not customary to sue leaders of a country
for proposing legitimate or illegitimate claims on another country's territory.
But what is customary in such contexts is first and foremost to ignore
those claims. If the claims become vociferous with plenty of intrigues,
as has been the case with UAE leaders activities against our national interest
and our national and territorial integrity, then we have to challenge them
to prove their case legally at international level. In their reaction to
this challenge they bluffed their way to take us to the International Court
of Justice. We replied naturally that we had no business in bringing doubt
to our perfectly legitimate and legal ownership of the three islands by
going to the ICJ in response to a falsely put together petition of the
UAE. Later in 2004, the leaders in Abu Dhabi, supported actively by the
Sheikh of Qatar, opted on physical attempt to interrupt undisputed Iranian
sovereignty over these islands bay undertaking sporadic military attack
on Abu Musa territorial waters, arresting a number of Iranian subjects
fishermen therein, kidnapping them to Abu Dhabi and Doha, beating them
up in Dubai and killing one in Doha. The Iranian foreign minister of the
time decided that these acts of violence and affront to our national dignity
and our territorial integrity should go without the internationally prescribe
in the form of reprisal or official complaint to UN Security Council. The
Sheikh of Qatar arranged later, in 2008 for the Arab League to lodge a
formal complaint against Iran with the United Nations Security Council
on behalf of the UAE. Not only the Iranian foreign ministry did react to
this outrageous behavior, but the Foreign Minister of the time, enticed
by the Sheikh of Qatar, took part in the meeting of Arab League council
of foreign minister that lodge that complaint with the UNSC actively ridiculing
his own office, his government's respectability, his country's territorial
integrity, and his nation's honor. But a legally argued petition based
on strong historiography of the situation that I sent to the UN Secretary
General, regardless of lack of any reaction from the Iranian foreign ministry,
produced the good result of Arab League's complaint being turned down by
the UN Security Council and its literatures being wiped off the UN sites.
|
