Chapter 4

The Various Causes and Features of the Islamic Revolution

The Islamic Revolution and Its Charismatic Leader

Despite economic growth and social development, there was an increasingly popular opposition to the Shah and his policies during the 1970s. The opposition came from a wide range of political and ideological orientations, but it was led by Ayatollah Khomeini who lived in exile in Iraq. In 1977 the declarations of Ayatollah Khomeini were circulated in Iranian cities and his name was synonymous with opposition to Pahlavi’s regime. On January 9, 1978, a group of religious students in the city of Qom protested the visit of the American President, Jimmy Carter and demanded the return of Ayatollah Khomeini to the country. Shortly after, an insulting article in a daily paper against Ayatollah Khomeini caused a demonstration in Qom. The police opened fire on the protesters and killed many of them.¹ Forty days after the massacre in Qom, people took to the streets to commemorate the martyrs according to Shia traditions and showed their anger at the government actions. Once more, the police opened fire on the protesters and many people were killed in Tabriz, in the Azerbaijan province. The commemoration of Tabriz martyrs sparked protests in other cities such as Yazd and Isfahan and the ensuing chain of nationwide revolutionary demonstrations defied Shah’s authority. The demonstrations were inspired mainly by traditional Shia culture, labeling the Shah as the tyrannical Yazid and encouraging resistance through sacrifice. The mass demonstrations were often led by men wearing white shrouds to indicate their willingness for martyrdom. By August 1979, demonstrations had become an undeniable reality in all Iranian cities. The Shah tried to calm the situation by appointing new prime ministers but all these attempts turned out to be too little, too late, and surely ineffective. The revolution was already in progress and the Shah had lost control over the country.² In all these demonstrations, the name and picture of one person was always heard and seen: Ayatollah Khomeini. Khomeini aimed at Islamizing all aspects of society such as politics, state, culture, education, law, and economy.³ During his exile in Najaf (Iraq), he had developed his ideology of absolutist theocracy, but in 1978 he was deliberately silent about this doctrine and pretended to be a spiritual man who envisioned progressive and democratic rule. On many occasions, Khomeni had mentioned that he would not be a leader of the government.⁴ From his exile in France in 1978, Khomeini was effectively leading the uprising. He declared that “the struggle will continue until the establishment of an Islamic Republic that guarantees the freedom of the people, the independence of the country, and the attainment of social justice.”⁵ By 1978, he has gained unquestionable popularity and all dissidents, including Marxists, leftists, and seculars, respected his leadership.

On February 1, 1979, Khomeini returned to Iran after 14 years of exile. As the leader of the revolution, he received a warm welcome from millions of enthusiastic Iranians at the airport. Only 10 days later, after some skirmishes in the capital Tehran, the revolutionary forces took control over the country. On February 11, 1979, the Iranian radio feverishly announced the victory of the revolution and claimed the end of monarchy. By referring to their Shia beliefs, many Iranians were seeing the Hidden Imam in Khomeini and were dreaming of creating a utopian society. In an irrational ecstasy, millions of people rushed into the streets and celebrated the beginning of a supposedly heavenly era. On April 1, 1979, after a national referendum, Ayatollah Khomeini officially declared Iran to be an Islamic Republic and became the supreme leader of Iran. The Islamic Revolution happened swiftly; it seemed multidimensional, complex, and most of all, irrational.

The Aftermath of the Revolution

The euphoria of the celebration did not last for a long time. Shortly afterward, the revolutionary courts were established and hundreds of the previous regime’s officials were ruthlessly executed. The country became the scene of disorder and power struggle among different political and ideological factions including fundamentalist Muslims, liberals, Marxists, leftists, and nationalists. While there was an interim government in place, the central authority had broken down. In fact, the semi-independent revolutionary committees were performing a variety of functions across the country and did not accept the authority of the central government. Thanks to his charismatic influence, Ayatollah Khomeini intervened in all spheres of government responsibilities, made major decisions, and established new institutions without consulting his revolutionary prime minister. In addition, the country was overwhelmed by ethnic conflicts as minorities such as Kurds, Arabs, and Turkmens claimed ethnic autonomy. Faced with internal turmoil, Khomeini created the Revolutionary Guards as a special military force loyal to the clerical leaders in order to protect the Islamic Revolution. Furthermore, the revolutionary regime took some drastic measures not only to stifle dissidents, but also to ban opposing newspapers and restrict civil liberties. Those who had complained of lack of freedom under the Pahlavi rule were disappointed by the new dictatorship that seemed much harsher.

Externally, the nascent Islamic Republic was involved in multiple disputes with neighboring and Western countries. The relations with the United States were especially litigious, as the Islamic regime was demanding extradition of the Shah. On November 4, 1979, Iranian students stormed the United States embassy in Tehran and took American diplomats as hostages. The incident led to a political crisis, and as a result, Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan resigned. Subsequently, the diplomatic relations between the revolutionary regime and the United States were cut off and Iran was engulfed in an increasing foreign and domestic turmoil. In the belief that Iran was too weak to resist, Saddam Hussein took advantage of the revolutionary chaos to wage a massive war against Iran. Enjoying the full support of the United States, on September 22, Iraqi military forces crossed the Iranian border and rapidly invaded parts of the Iranian territories. While Iran was a revolutionary and isolated country, Iraq had cozy relations with all Western countries especially with the United States. Indeed, Iraq received direct military support from all Western countries, the Soviet Union, and all Arab countries except Syria. During the early stages of war, the situation for Iran was extremely difficult, as the Iranian army was disorganized, the military equipments were not sufficient, and the regime was fighting insurgencies and internal opposition groups. Yet, the Islamic regime adroitly managed to take advantage of both religious and nationalistic spirits to mobilize a huge army of enthusiastic young volunteers who were ready to defend their nation. These young volunteers (Basiji) were not well trained, but fought heroically and were fully committed to the Islamic Revolution. In the beginning, the Iraqi forces were dominant; however an apparently diluted Iranian army attained unexpected defensive success. It seems that Saddam Hussein had not taken the Iranian human factor into consideration. Despite all their domestic and foreign problems, the revolutionary regime overcame the adversary. By summer of 1982, the Iraqi military forces were driven out of Iran. Contrary to Saddam’s predictions, the war became long and bloody and cost more than a million lives on both sides. After eight years of horrific conflict, the two countries finally accepted a ceasefire in 1988.

The war with Iraq resulted in radicalization of the Islamic regime. The moderate figures of the revolution were gradually sidelined or eliminated. Subsequently, the regime took some extreme measures to reinforce the Islamic values by modifying the legal system, segregating sexes, curbing media, and purging government institutions and universities from seculars or liberals. Despite the substantial external threat, the war with Iraq strengthened the Islamic regime by uniting Iranian society and by providing the regime with a strong pretext to stifle the domestic opposition.⁶ In the 1980s, the Islamic regime was fighting on both external and internal fronts. The external front was the war against Iraqi invaders, but in fact, it had a wider scope and included an ideological conflict with all the Western and Arab countries that supported Saddam Hussein’s regime. The internal front was even more threatening and consisted of a full-fledged conflict with the domestic opposition groups ranging from Muslim liberals to seculars, monarchists, Marxists, and ethnic separatists. For the young Islamic Republic, both threats were existential. Therefore, the Islamic regime did not differentiate between the internal and external oppositions and fought on both fronts with the same tactics. The war volunteers (Basiji and Islamic Revolutionary Guards) who have been fighting against Iraq were skillfully utilized to stifle any kinds of social, civil, or political discontent inside Iran. At some points nearly all opposing groups were labeled traitors and were subject to execution by revolutionary courts. The exact number of executions is not known, but it could hover around 20,000 to 50,000 between 1980 and 1995. As a result of mass executions, opposition groups were practically eradicated or fled abroad. Perhaps the reigns of terror and violence are inherent in all revolutions, particularly in an Islamic one.

Once the war with Iraq was over, the Islamic regime had to veer to a more moderate and pragmatic path to respond to the population’s increasing expectations such as economic growth, employment, education, and health care. Following the death of Ayatollah Khomeini on June 3, 1989, the Assembly of Experts elected Ali Khamenei as the supreme leader. Subsequently, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani was elected president. The new government led by Rafsanjani took some substantial measures to revive the Iranian economy that had been devastated by the war and poor planning. During the 1990s, the Islamic Republic concentrated on social and economic reconstruction, health care and family planning, and education and literacy programs. The reconstruction programs continued after the election of Mohammad Khatami as president in 1997. During his tenure, in addition to economic planning, Khatami initiated significant political reforms to create a more open society. Khatami’s policies met tough opposition from the supreme leader and his conservative supporters. He was exceptionally successful in normalizing relations with the West and neighboring countries. The era of Khatamai ended in 2005 when hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president and claimed a return to the revolutionary principles of the 1980s. To some extent he tried to follow a hard line in both domestic and foreign policies. He was not successful in reviving the 1980s principles, but adopted chaotic, populist, and confrontational policies. In June 2009, Ahmadinejad was re-elected president for a second term. Supporters of the opponents, Mir Hossein Moussavi in particular, took to the streets to protest the fraud. In the end, the Islamic regime managed to use police and paramilitary Basij forces to suffocate the unrest and restore the calm.

The Complex Nature of the Islamic Revolution

The collapse of monarchy came as a surprise not only to foreign observers, but also to Iranian people and Shah’s close associates.⁷ The revolutionary movement swept through the country in less than a year and quickly overthrew the most stable regime in the Middle East.⁸ In that sense, the Islamic Revolution of 1979 can be qualified as astonishing, extraordinary, and influential. It was not just a simple rebellion or protest; it was quite similar to other great popular upheavals, for example the French and Russian Revolutions.⁹ The Islamic Revolution may be labeled as a social revolution since it was certainly one of the most popular uprisings in the world.¹⁰ It was the result of a mass-based social movement that aimed to overthrow the Shah’s political, cultural, and economic order.¹¹ It brought substantial changes to the state of the country, class structures, and governing doctrines.¹² It reversed the course of Westernization process of Iran that had been started under the Reza Shah Pahlavi rule and instead revived the Islamic ideology as a source of inspiration for other Islamic movements in the Middle East and across the world. The uniqueness of the Iranian revolution resides in its Islamic ideology that fueled the uprising and offered an alternative model for the Muslim world that was opposed to the political and cultural hegemony of the United States and the West. The complexity of Islamic Revolution resides in its multifaceted nature, in its popular support, in its far-reaching ramifications, in its breadth and depth, and especially in its contradicting features. While the Revolution was essentially Islamic, it was supported by a wide range of secular intellectuals, nationalists, and also the leftists and communists. The Revolution was basically a democratic movement, but it created one of the most authoritarian regimes in the Iranian history. It promised freedom and equality, but ironically it brought hate, intolerance, and bloodshed. Surprisingly, many of the early revolutionaries became the first prisoners in the new regime. How can we explain such contradictions? Perhaps, these contradictions have originated from the Iranian national identity. The Iranian identity is, by itself, highly complex and paradoxical; it oscillates between modernity and tradition. It is Islamic, but at the same time it is pre-Islamic and Persian. It embraces the future, but it is haunted by the shadow of the past.¹³ Likewise, the Iranian Revolution was a combination of progressive and modern forces mixing up democracy, freedom, equality, justice, and leftist ideology with theocracy, bigotry, intolerance, and backwardness. In other words, the Islamic Revolution was a blend of tradition and modernity, intellectuals and clerics, nationalism and God, communism and Islam, reactionary and progressive forces, and tolerance and violence. The Pahlavi regime was brought down by an alliance of heterogeneous groups including traditionalist bazaar merchants, radicalized clerics, young students, leftist-communist forces, intellectuals, nationalists, and middle class urban citizens.¹⁴ All these dissimilar forces rallied behind Ayatollah Khomeini against the Shah, but in fact they had different agendas and pursued conflicting objectives. As Kissinger pointed out, revolutions take place when a variety of forces unite to assault an unsuspecting regime. The broader the revolutionary coalition, the greater its destruction, and the more sweeping the change, the more violence is needed to reestablish order and authority.¹⁵

The Various Causes and Features of
the Islamic Revolution

Revolution as a Backlash Against the Accelerated Modernization or Westernization

Historically, the roots of the revolution can be sought in social reforms that took place in the 1930s when Reza Shah Pahlavi launched some ambitious modernization initiatives.¹⁶ Both the Pahlavi monarchs were impatient to transform an undeveloped, agrarian, and traditional Iran to a modern, strong, and developed society.¹⁷ Reza Shah focused much energy on state-building by developing military, bureaucracy, and education system.¹⁸ He ordered military conscription in which all Iranians from different ethnicities were required to speak Persian and to carry identity cards with family names. He created a strong centralized government and swiftly moved to secularize Iranian society by building modern education institutions, universities, courts, banks, and government organizations. He replaced the Muslim lunar calendar with a solar one, banned tribal and traditional clothing, and advocated women’s rights.¹⁹ For that reason, Reza Shah is often recognized as the great modernizer. Likewise, his son Mohammad Reza Shah was obsessed with socioeconomic development and had lofty ambitions to move Iran to the rank of the five most industrialized nations.²⁰ During the 1960s and the 1970s, the Shah launched his famous White Revolution and land reforms, which resulted in depriving landowners and clergy of their considerable traditional and religious privileges.²¹ Under his rule, women’s rights were greatly improved and the educational system had a significant overhaul.²² Agricultural, educational, and legal reforms created modern and Westernized institutions replacing the religious institutions. At the same time, Shah’s cultural modernization program aimed to reduce the importance of Islam by revitalizing the ancient Persian culture. In 1971, he organized the celebrations of the 2500th anniversary of the establishment of the Iranian dynasty with great fanfare and introduced new national holidays derived from the ancient history of Iran. Most of these reforms caused discontent with the Pahlavi regime among the population.²³ The clerics and traditional bazaar merchants were particularly disturbed by the modernization and socioeconomic reforms as they were losing much of their influence and interests. Because of the close association between modernization and Westernization, the clerics targeted Shah’s policies and labeled him as a traitor to the Iranian nation and an agent of anti-Islamic imperialist forces. In the 1960s and 1970s, much of the Khomeini’s rhetoric was directed at Shah’s modernization or Westernization policies that according to him were menacing Islam. Khomeini threatened that if the regime continued their reforms, he would ask the people to expel the Shah.²⁴ In response to Shah’s reforms, he repeatedly preached that Islam was under threat. In his view, the threat to Islam stemmed from an accelerated and ruthless social modernization undertaken by the Shah. The Shah who was raised with Western education had a totally different perspective and sought to modernize Iran at any cost. In his opinion, the clerics represented the dark reactionary forces blocking the path of Iran’s progress. While the Shah insisted on his accelerated modernization and dreamt of building the Great Persian Civilization, the traditional forces were developing their networks of resistance. Khomeini’s message was gaining popularity not only among clerics, but also among the newly urbanized population who were not comfortable with the modernization programs. The Shah’s reforms pushed the population to the arms of the Shia clergy who mobilized them with traditional and religious values.²⁵ As the Shah pushed his Westernization or Modernization agenda, population’s discontent grew and many Iranians saw him as an evil that was committed to the destruction of the Iranian religious and traditional identities. After all, they felt that to get rid of the Western influence, they needed to overthrow the Pahlavi regime.²⁶ As some scholars have pointed out, the Islamic Revolution can be described as a clash between the accelerated Westernization or modernization process and the traditional or religious forces.²⁷ In that sense, the Islamic Revolution was the victory of traditionalism over modernization. The history showed that the Shah had underestimated the power of the traditional forces.

Rebellion Against Dictatorship

Although Iran was a constitutional monarchy, the Shah ruled the country as an absolutist monarch.²⁸ The political power was concentrated in the ruling class that consisted of high ranking bureaucrats, capitalists, and influential families.²⁹ The Shah had built a system centered on his person and was directly involved in every important decision making. He personally made all major resolutions, appointed officials, initiated reform programs, and was even openly involved in domestic and foreign investments.³⁰ All decisions required his approval,³¹ and especially during the last decade of his rule, he had become enormously arrogant and stubborn. Despite all the astonishing economic reforms, the political transformation and exercise of the democratic process had not taken place in the country. In 1975, the Shah created a single-party political system to dictate his own policies. Naturally, the centralization of power resulted in his political vulnerability.³² While his political rule did not enjoy the popular support,³³ the Shah wrongly relied on his strong army and ruthless secret police forces. Due to his secret police cruelty, opposition groups went underground and became increasingly radicalized.³⁴ In addition to the regime’s cruel oppression, the rampant corruption, inefficiency, and social injustice, contributed to the population’s dissatisfaction with the Shah’s authoritarian rule.³⁵ In the end, the criticism was directed to his Excellency and he finally became the common enemy of the diverse groups such as nationalists, seculars, Marxists, Islamist, leftist, intellectuals, and clerics. The Shah’s political dictatorship and repression can be described as the main causes of the Islamic Revolution. It is not surprising that during 1977 to 78, all the social resentment was directed to the Shah’s absolutist rule and the main slogan of the revolutionaries was Death to the Shah. Since all decisions were concentrated in the hands’ of the Shah, high ranking officials and military officers were literally incapable of saving the monarchy in 1978.³⁶

Economic Causes

The state of Iran’s economy was not so terrible that it warranted revolt by itself, but the Shah’s massive reforms led to economic discomfort among large portions of the Iranian population and ultimately created an opportunity for an uprising.³⁷ For instance, the Shah used the state power to promote industrial capitalism and badly embarrassed the powerful traditional bazaar merchants (bazaaris).³⁸ Similarly, the Shah’s agricultural policies led to massive migration to large cities and resulted in high urban employment. The Shah paid much attention to Iran’s oil industry, but neglected other sectors of economy, particularly agriculture.³⁹ The farmers were suffering and often had to migrate to Tehran and other large cities because farming was not a reliable job for them in the countryside after the land reforms. Meanwhile, the urban unemployed population grew rapidly in Tehran and other large cities.⁴⁰ The reforms and inappropriate economic policies resulted in the formation of spawning slums around the cities and the creation of a huge class of urban poor.⁴¹ On the other side, the rising oil revenues brought about inflation, concentration of wealth, increasing social gap between the rich and the poor, and rampant corruption in the centers of power.⁴² Furthermore, much of the economic reforms seemed like superficial programs that did not rely on sound planning and did not pave the road to Iran’s industrialization or development.⁴³ From an economic perspective, the Islamic Revolution might be seen as a revolt by the urban middle class workers, the unprivileged groups, and the traditional merchants (Bazaaris) who were losers of the Shah’s economic reforms. The Revolution provided some opportunities for abolishing privileges of the dominant groups, confiscating their possessions, and tearing down the institutions that supported them.⁴⁴

Nationalism and the Third-Worldist Perspective

Along with the previous explanations, it is possible to view the Islamic Revolution as a genuine popular assertion of Muslim and Iranian identity against the Western political, technical, economic, and cultural domination.⁴⁵ Remember that the Shah was installed into power by an American-British organized coup d’état in 1953 that toppled Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mossadegh.⁴⁶ Furthermore, the Western intervention in the Iranian domestic affairs during the 19th and 20th centuries had created a bitter memory in the Iranian collective psyche. The Shah was widely seen as an American agent who was promoting the Western interests. As such, the Islamic revolution can be seen as a third-worldist movement, attempting to liberate the country from the Western imperialism. After all, the main characteristics of the Islamic Revolution were hostility to the West and an emphasis placed on the indigenous economy and culture.⁴⁷ The new revolutionary ideology had an Islamic-nationalist dimension that was a reaction to the Western colonial influence.⁴⁸ Not surprisingly, the Islamic Revolution was a source of inspiration for many Middle Eastern and third-world countries in their opposition to the Western hegemony.

Revolution and the Need for Spirituality

For some observers, the mass protests of middle class urban citizens, merchants, and well-dressed university students against the Shah took place in absence of any clear social or economical basis. According to this perspective, the Iranian Revolution was derived from a need for something novel, spiritual, and divine. The late leader of the Iranian Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini, once said: “Our revolution was the explosion of light,” emphasizing that the revolution was not simply seeking material and economic improvement, rather it aimed at religious and spiritual betterment. In addition to the socioeconomic and cultural explanations, it is possible to view the Islamic Revolution as a spiritual movement aiming at liberating politics and society from the materialism. This is in line with what the French philosopher Michel Foucault introduced as political ­spirituality in the 1970s.⁴⁹ In other words, the Islamic Revolution was an attempt to overthrow the materialistic power of the Shah by relying on spiritual forces.⁵⁰ The Islamic Revolution promised to the Iranian people something moral that would drastically change their subjectivity.⁵¹ Indeed, many supporters of the Islamic Revolution eagerly sacrificed their well-being to establish a spiritual and religious society, free from the corrupt and materialistic vices of Western liberal democracies. It is well known that the Iranians who support the Islamic Revolution often call it a Revolution of Values.⁵² As Ayatollah Khomeini has famously said:, “People did not rise up to get cheaper melons.”

Revolution and Conspiracy Theories

Iran is located in a very critical part of the world, more precisely in the Middle East between the Persian Gulf and the former Soviet Union. In addition to this strategic location, the country sits on abundant oil and gas resources and plays a crucial role in energy markets. This geopolitical and energetic importance naturally makes the country prone to foreign meddling. As a result, some suggest that the great powers in general and the Soviets, Americans, British, and even the French might have been involved in influencing or organizing some factions of the Islamic Revolution. This perspective is very rampant among the Iranian royalists who believe that the Islamic Revolution was a conspiracy against the Iranian nation to create political and social turmoil and ultimately impede the rise of Iran as a great regional power. Princess Ashraf Pahlavi once commented that there were foreign countries that saw Iran under the Pahlavi rule as a rising power and they did not want the emergence of another Japan in the Middle East.⁵³ The supporters of the conspiracy theory are suspicious of President Carter’s human rights policies and his lack of support to the Shah.⁵⁴ They are suspicious of the unhelpful role of France in giving residency to Ayatollah Khomeini in 1977 at the height of turmoil. They are distrustful of the destructive and anti-Pahlavi programs of the BBC Persian Radio in 1977. More importantly, they are suspicious of the speed at which the revolution gained momentum and overthrew such a well-established monarchy. They see the chain of events before and after the Islamic Revolution with great suspicion and ask why Shah’s strong and loyal armed forces did not intervene to defend the royal regime or at least, to protect their own families. They cannot believe that the strongest army in the Middle East was defeated by an urban guerilla movement in less than two days.